This is the mail archive of the cygwin-apps mailing list for the Cygwin project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

tftp for x86_64 uploaded (was Re: Please build 64 bit packages)


On Aug  1 11:05, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> On Aug  1 03:40, Yaakov (Cygwin/X) wrote:
> > On 2013-08-01 02:57, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> > >On Jul 31 18:23, Yaakov (Cygwin/X) wrote:
> > >>I just copied over the newest version of all noarch packages whose
> > >>deps are available.  Ignoring obsolete packages, as of this moment,
> > >>the diffstat between the arches is +81/-316.
> > >
> > >Cool, many thanks!
> > >
> > >How did you generate the diffstat?  The numbers indicate a lot of
> > >preliminary work before running the tool since a simple diff returns
> > >numbers along the lines of -1000/+1500.
> > 
> > First off, I'm basing my numbers on *source* packages.  I then
> > removed all obsolete packages from the i686 list, as well as the
> > cygwin{32,64}-* packages from both lists (since those aren't really
> > relevant to this discussion).  A copy of my list is at
> > sourceware:~yselkowitz/TODO_DISTRO_X64.diff.
> 
> Thanks.
> 
> > >So I'm wondering, do you have a list of important packages (like,
> > >say, ocaml, inetutils, any libs) still missing?  It might help to
> > >get a better picture of the state of the x86_64 distro.
> > 
> > I'd say llvm, nspr, ocaml and postgresql are the most noticeable
> > missing prereqs at the moment.  The first two are mine, but they
> > require significant porting work (particularly llvm), and I've been
> > focused on other packages.  There are a few other minor libraries
> > missing, but the rest looks to be mostly programs that just need a
> > rebuild.
> 
> I could take your diff and generate a "missing packages" list with
> maintainer names from there and publish it here on cygwin-apps.
> I could do this every few weeks, so we could keep a porting progress
> and discussion platform to discuss the dependencies which still have
> to be resolved.
> 
> Does that sounds useful?

Btw., I just built and uploaded the tftp package for x86_64.
For some reason, even though inetutils is built without tftp
and tftpd support, it still needs the arp/tftp.h file provided
by the tftp package.


Corinna

-- 
Corinna Vinschen                  Please, send mails regarding Cygwin to
Cygwin Maintainer                 cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Red Hat


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]