[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: [PATCH] cross-compilation for binutils.



David Woodhouse <dwmw2 infradead org> writes:

> But it would be nice if we could have a 'clean' dependency chain along
> the lines of:
>
>  cross-gcc --> cross-glibc --> cross-libgcc.so

Not easy with current rpm:

* assuming 'rpm' can extract PROVIDES/NEEDED out of cross built binaries,
  you will run into the problem that there are cross and native packages
  which are both providing the same 'libc.so.6'.  When another native
  package requires 'libc.so.6', the cross package might get installed.

  RPM would have to annotate these provides/requires.

  I hacked around it by disabling automatic dependencies (--> no
  --file-requires anymore :( ) and using custom find-provides/requires
  scripts.  It's very hacky but surprisingly it works since FC-5 till
  F-9...


* you have to package cross-glibc as 'noarch' or as the native arch; it
  won't be possible to install a package of target arch (at least not
  without --ignore-arch).


* 'BuildArch: noarch' does not create -debuginfo packages and that's
  very hardcoded into the rpm macros :(


* some post-install scripts (...strip, ...debuginfo) use native binutils
  which fail on cross-built binaries.  This is easy to workaround as
  recent rpm (FC-6+) allows to customize the %__strip and %__objdump
  tools


When your ambitions stop at cross-libgcc, you can set manual 'Provides:'
and 'Requires:'.  Providing complete cross environments (e.g. for ARM where
you can not/do not want built natively due to hardware restrictions), needs
changes to rpm or lots of %macros.



Enrico


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]