[Fedora-packaging] Namespace for cross-compilation tools?

Andreas Thienemann andreas at bawue.net
Thu Jun 29 01:26:47 UTC 2006

On Wed, 28 Jun 2006, Ralf Corsepius wrote:

> > binutils-i386-arm-%{version}-%{release}.%{dist}.%{target}.rpm?
> Confusing, because
> a) in repos, other packages from this toolchain will not be next to each
> other, i.e. hardly browsable.
But the binutils will be together with the host binutils and other cross 
compiler binutils.

That can be considered nice as well.

> b) How would you want to call other add on package for your toolchain?
> libc-i386-arm? libncurses-i386-arm?
glibc-i386-arm-elf probably.
But one could also go with prepending cross- to make the distinction 

> c) The fact your toolchain is running on i386's already is part of the
> rpm's NVR-$arch.rpm => the i386 is redundant and superfluos.
I thought about leaving it out, but considered it clearer to just name it 
without having to force the user to shift his eyes to the right and look 
for the arch tag.
> d) "arm" is an architecture and is not sufficient to describe a
> toolchain's target. A toolchain's target consists of more.
> In case of "bare metal toolchain" (No OS, no libc), this could be
> arm-elf or arm-bare-elf or even arm-coff.
You're right about that. I meant arm-elf, as this is what I was building, 
but simply forgot about the -elf part.


More information about the Fedora-packaging mailing list