On Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 09:23:41PM +0100, Florian Lohoff wrote: > On Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 10:37:03AM -0800, Pete Popov wrote: > > glibc. Others might have similar toolchains they can point you at. > > Another option is native builds, which I personally don't like. > > Cross compiling is definitly no option for debian as the dependencies > etc are all made from "ldd binary" which has to fail for cross-compiling. > I guess this also happens to rpm packages so cross-compiling to really > get a correct distribution is definitly no option. > There are other ways to figure out the dependency in a cross-compiling environment. We have an internal tool that does just that and more (some size/fs optimization stuff). It is not used in the current release, though. > The larger the packages are the harder it is to get them cross-compiled > correctly as they run nifty little check programs from configure which > cant work. I guess you had similar problems as all rpms are > "noarch" which is definitly - ummm - interesting. > The "noarch" means the installed target is arch-independent. The standard setup in mvista CDK is to let target boot from NFS root fs, where NFS host can be linux/i386, Linux/ppc and Sun/Sparc (perhaps Win/i386 as well, I am not sure). Those packages are meant to be installed to all those hosts, and therefore "noarch" :-0. > I definitly go for native builds - Once you have a working stable > base you can set up debian autobuilders which will do nearly > everything for you except signing and uploading the package into > the main repository. > Native compiling is easy. Cross-compiling is cool. :-) Well, not exactly. When you are dealing with head-less, disk-less memory-scarce embedded devices with ad hoc run-time environments, cross-compiling is your only choice. Jun
