>Date: Sat, 27 Jan 2001 11:52:05 +0100 (MET) >From: Karel van Houten <K.H.C.vanHouten@research.kpn.com> >Subject: Re: Cross compiling RPMs >To: mikemac@mikemac.com (Mike McDonald) > >Mike wrote: >> >> If one were to go the native compiling route, what would the minimum >> set of rpms needed be? kernel, bin-utils, cc. file-utils? ??? >> > >It depends on what and how you want to compile. To use rpm, you need >quite a lot tools (db3, patch, sed, grep, find,...). Beside that >you'll at least need glibc, binutils, gcc, and make. But you'll find >out that you'll have to compile flex, bison, m4, automake, autoconf, >and even perl to get rpm builds going. My mipsel native environment >currently has the following packages: I was thinking of what the MINIMUM set of RPMs you needed installed so you could bootstrap a system up from sources, not what's the minimum needed to recompile any arbitrary RPM. >But you surely can start with less... :-) With less than 150 files installed in a root file system, I can install the bin-utils, gcc, make, and glibc RPMs. From there, I should be able to begin cross compiling the other basic RPMs for a system. That's my ultimate goal. Mike McDonald mikemac@mikemac.com
