[Bug 652987] Review Request: go - The Go programming language

[bugzilla at redhat.com]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=652987

--- Comment #54 from Albert Strasheim <fullung at gmail.com> 2012-03-15 12:12:11 EDT ---
A few ideas:

Since godoc needs all the source, I was thinking of splitting off a go-doc
package that has the godoc binary and the sources.

As far as I understand, cross-compiling is easy these days, so we could build:

default packages:

go.i686 <-- contains 386 packages and 8g, 8c, 8l
go.x86_64 <-- contains amd64 packages and 6g, 6c, 6l
go.armv5tel <-- contains arm packages and 5g, 5c, 5l, GOARM=5
go.armv7hl <-- contains arm packages and 5g, 5c, 5l, GOARM=6

and then all the cross-compilers. maybe it's not necessary to build all
combinations.

go-amd64.i686 (useful for testing cross-compiler building infrastructure)
go-386.x86_64 (useful for testing cross-compiler building infrastructure)

go-armv5tel.i686
go-armv5tel.x86_64

go-armv7hl.i686 (or we could call this go-arm6?)
go-armv7hl.x86_64

go-armv5tel could be called go-arm5.

go-armv7hl could be called go-arm6.

Feedback please?

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.