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

Re: Cross-compilers.



David Woodhouse wrote:
We might want to put libgcc into a separate package for the
cross-toolchain, unless we can _fake_ the presence of glibc. We might
only really need a dummy DSO to link libgcc against; it doesn't actually
have to be glibc -- it only needs about 10 symbols to be present iirc.

Would you trust a gcc built against a fake glibc? I wouldn't. When bootstrapping a glibc targeted cross compiler, my method is:

1. Create minimal sys-root with glibc-kernheaders (Haven't done this since the package change) plus a few fake headers that glibc would normally provide.

2. Create target-gcc with step 1 headers.

3. Create target-glibc sys-root with step 2.

4. Create final target-gcc with step 3.

5. Create final target-glibc with step 4.

Steps 1-3 are throw-away bits. Placing cross compilers in Fedora does not require all this because the build system does not need to solve the chicken&egg problem. The main problem to be solved is The Right Way (tm) to leverage those already-generated files that a sys-root is composed of.

Suggestions:

1. Repackage binary rpms as noarch rpms under a sys-root tree.

2. Modify rpm such that RPMs of different architectures can be installed in a sys-root tree.

3. Modify Fedora so that all headers and libraries are by default in a sys-root.

4. Modify something (rpm? all packages?) such that an optional sys-root package is emitted along with devel packages. Sort of like debuginfo.

...

-Brendan (blc redhat com)


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