This is the mail archive of the
cygwin-apps
mailing list for the Cygwin project.
Re: Please build 64 bit packages
- From: Corinna Vinschen <corinna-cygwin at cygwin dot com>
- To: cygwin-apps at cygwin dot com
- Date: Thu, 1 Aug 2013 11:05:44 +0200
- Subject: Re: Please build 64 bit packages
- References: <20130725121526 dot GE5086 at calimero dot vinschen dot de> <51F99C62 dot 60207 at users dot sourceforge dot net> <20130801075727 dot GG4166 at calimero dot vinschen dot de> <51FA1EE3 dot 7050206 at users dot sourceforge dot net>
- Reply-to: cygwin-apps at cygwin dot com
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?
Corinna
--
Corinna Vinschen Please, send mails regarding Cygwin to
Cygwin Maintainer cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Red Hat