On Wed, 2007-06-13 at 08:55 +0100, David Woodhouse wrote: > On Wed, 2007-06-13 at 09:38 +0200, Hans de Goede wrote: > > I think you on the one side and I and Ralf on the other side are talking about > > different things, let me try to clarify. I believe you are talking about cross > > building the Fedora distro to run as a replacement distro on embedded devices, > > in which case I agree with what you say above. > > Yes. To start with, I have been thinking about Fedora->Fedora (or at > least Fedora->Linux) cross-compilation. Let me try to clarify. I am referring to general Fedora-><any target/any-OS> cross toolchains, not necessarily restricted to Fedora targets. My primary focus is on <Fedora|RHEL>->*rtems* cross toolchains (rtems: A free rt-OS for embedded targets) for which I am co-maintaining/co-leading OS- and toolchain-development and also am providing toolchain rpms. Peculiar about such targets is them often addressing "2nd class architectures", which have little attention in upstream binutils/GCC/gdb and therefore often require custom patches, or particular hand-selected "known to work" source versions. My secondary focus is on sys-rooted Fedora-><BigOS> toolchains, reusing target binaries, in first place aiming at Canadian cross building <BigOS>->*rtems* toolchains on Fedora, in second place serving as "test beds" for portability issues in packages. > > However I (and Ralf to some extend to AFAIK) am talking about building > > executables to run on an embedded platform using the manufacturer provided > > distro for that platform. For example with the gp2x (a handheld game device / > > video player) there is a distro in onboard FLASH and you can insert an sd-card > > with your own applications. > > > > In this case completely different rules apply. > > Yes, this is true. Where there are ABI differences, it makes sense to > have a toolchain version which matches your target environment. ABI is one thing. But there are other things, not necessarily in binutils, but more in GCC and gdb. E.g. consider Fedora->FreeBSD, Fedora->SuSE, Fedora->MinGW toolchains. Though they share the same basis, they are substantially different in many details. One lesson I've learned through all these years, I am building cross-toolchains: Use upstream binaries whenever possible, only they are 100% compatible to native toolchains/run-time, use upstream source whenever possible to minimize the risk of producing incompatible toolchains. Ralf -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
