[gentoo-user] Re: How to compile for less bits :)
Jacob Todd jaketodd422 at gmail.com writes: Cross compiling on unix is confusing because the compiler sucks. (hmmm, nope you are wrong, and statements like that will get you little helpimho http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/base/embedded/handbook/ Some wizards of cross_compiling hang out on gentoo-embedded Display excellent manners and you may get help, real help.. hth, James
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: How to compile for less bits :)
Although we understand your frustration we do not sympathyse becasue we've all had to learn it. No it's not a checkbox it's a complie time option; and should be passed when you compile your code. like ls -alh GCC only looks difficult because you are new and have not used many other compilers; you will find and grow to love it if you use gentoo for a while; it's the most portable, widely used and cheapest compiler out there, we are lucky the GNU exists, othewise you'd have a crappy compiler from IBM to deal with. Also it doesn't come with an IDE, but Bluefish works mighty fine for me. Some light reading: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compiler You'll soon realize why every gentoo installation is as unique as the person running it. If you have not read this already: http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/base/embedded/cross-development.xml Start there, if you are confused or have questions, ask nicely. Please check the ego and attitude elsewhere. Regards, Hazen. On Thu, Sep 30, 2010 at 10:01 AM, James wirel...@tampabay.rr.com wrote: Jacob Todd jaketodd422 at gmail.com writes: Cross compiling on unix is confusing because the compiler sucks. (hmmm, nope you are wrong, and statements like that will get you little helpimho http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/base/embedded/handbook/ Some wizards of cross_compiling hang out on gentoo-embedded Display excellent manners and you may get help, real help.. hth, James -- Hazen Valliant-Saunders IT/IS Consultant (613) 355-5977
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: How to compile for less bits :)
Grant Edwards grant.b.edwa...@gmail.com [10-09-27 21:16]: On 2010-09-27, meino.cra...@gmx.de meino.cra...@gmx.de wrote: For my microcontroller board (ATMEL AT81RM920, linux based) Do you mean AT91RM9200? I want to crosscompile kernels and applications on my 64bit Gentoo linux. That's easy enough. The source of a gcc (prepared on a 32bit system I fear) for the purpose of crosscompiling from a 32bit system-- target is the above mentioned processor -- is available. Is it possible to compile this gcc as a 32bit-application on my 64bit system to ensure the same behaviour as it would if to was built on a original 32bit Gentoo Linux? You want to compile gcc on an AMD64 machine and end up with a cross-compiler that runs as an IA32 app and generates code for an ARM9 target? That's called a Canadian Cross, and is rather tricky, since it involves three different architectures: building a compiler on architecture A (AMD64) to be run on architecture B (IA32) and generate code for architecture C (ARM9). Can you explain why you want that rather than a normal cross compiler? IOW, why do you want to build a gcc cross compiler that runs as a 32-bit application? It's _way_ simpler to build a normal cross compiler: building a compiler one architecture (AMD64) to be run on that same architecture (AMD64) and generate code for a second architecture (ARM9). (And in this context: The audio application chuck is only as 32bit application available currently. How is it possible to compile this on a 64bit system?) You use a compiler that generates code for a the desired 32-bit architecture. The width of the host is immaterial. The easiest way to build such a compiler is using crosstool-ng http://ymorin.is-a-geek.org/projects/crosstool Crosstool-NG does have some support for doing a Canadian-cross, but I don't see why you would want to do that. -- Grant Edwards grant.b.edwardsYow! Gibble, Gobble, we at ACCEPT YOU ... gmail.com Hi Grant, Thank you very much for your offered help! Sorry, sorry I think my English confused a lot of infos... I'll try it again. Setup BEFORE I switched to 64bit Gentoo Linux. * a normal system gcc as installed by emerge usually on many (all?) gentoo systems... * a crosscompiling gcc in source form. Compiled with the normal gcc to an executable which runs on the 32bit Gentoo system and produces executables/kernel to run on the ATMEL AT91RM9200 (yes, you're right - this typo was mine ;) ) . * Additional chuck audio application only available for 32bit Linux, also compiled with the normal gcc Wanted setup on my shiny new 64bit Gentoo Linux: * a normal system gcc as installed by emerge usually on many (all?) gentoo systems... (== already there and living quite well) * a crosscompiling gcc in source form. To be Compiled with the normal gcc to an executable which runs on the 64bit Gentoo system and produces executables/kernel to run on the ATMEL AT91RM9200 (yes, you're right - this typo was mine ;) ) . OR: compiled to be an 32bit gcc-executable which generate executable binaries for my ATMEL cookie. As long a 64bit-executable of gcc can do the job I would prefer that solution of course. * Additional chuck audio application only available for 32bit Linux, to be compiled with the normal gcc to be a 32 bit executable since not 64bit-ready. I hope not to have made too much knots into that above... Best regards mcc
[gentoo-user] Re: How to compile for less bits :)
On 2010-09-29, meino.cra...@gmx.de meino.cra...@gmx.de wrote: (And in this context: The audio application chuck is only as 32bit application available currently. How is it possible to compile this on a 64bit system?) You use a compiler that generates code for a the desired 32-bit architecture. The width of the host is immaterial. Thank you very much for your offered help! Sorry, sorry I think my English confused a lot of infos... Cross-building stuff is just plain confusing. I'll try it again. Setup BEFORE I switched to 64bit Gentoo Linux. * a normal system gcc as installed by emerge usually on many (all?) gentoo systems... * a crosscompiling gcc in source form. Compiled with the normal gcc to an executable which runs on the 32bit Gentoo system and produces executables/kernel to run on the ATMEL AT91RM9200 (yes, you're right - this typo was mine ;) ). * Additional chuck audio application only available for 32bit Linux, also compiled with the normal gcc Wanted setup on my shiny new 64bit Gentoo Linux: * a normal system gcc as installed by emerge usually on many (all?) gentoo systems... (== already there and living quite well) * a crosscompiling gcc in source form. To be Compiled with the normal gcc to an executable which runs on the 64bit Gentoo system and produces executables/kernel to run on the ATMEL AT91RM9200 (yes, you're right - this typo was mine ;) ) . All you need to do is build a cross compiler for the ARM9 target the same way you did before. The width of the host where you're building things doesn't matter (if it does, that's a bug in gcc or binutils). I've had excellent results using the crosstool-ng makefile: http://ymorin.is-a-geek.org/projects/crosstool Crosstool is used by a lot of embedded developers. If there were problems building an ARM comiler on an AMD64 host, Yann Morin et al. are your best bet for a solution. You may want to take a look at the crossgcc mailing list: http://news.gmane.org/gmane.comp.gcc.cross-compiling http://sourceware.org/ml/crossgcc/ From a brief search of the mailing list, it appears that building an ARM compiler on an AMD64 machines works just fine. or, It's quite likely that you can install IA32 libraries on your AMD64 host OS and then use the exact same compiler executable you used before. OR: compiled to be an 32bit gcc-executable which generate executable binaries for my ATMEL cookie. As long a 64bit-executable of gcc can do the job I would prefer that solution of course. You really don't want to do that. It's rather tricky, and it shouldn't be required. * Additional chuck audio application only available for 32bit Linux, to be compiled with the normal gcc to be a 32 bit executable since not 64bit-ready. Just use the arm-linux-gcc compiler and you should be fine regardless of the width of the host on which you built the arm-linux-gcc compiler. -- Grant Edwards grant.b.edwardsYow! It's the RINSE CYCLE!! at They've ALL IGNORED the gmail.comRINSE CYCLE!!
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: How to compile for less bits :)
Grant Edwards grant.b.edwa...@gmail.com [10-09-30 00:32]: On 2010-09-29, meino.cra...@gmx.de meino.cra...@gmx.de wrote: (And in this context: The audio application chuck is only as 32bit application available currently. How is it possible to compile this on a 64bit system?) You use a compiler that generates code for a the desired 32-bit architecture. The width of the host is immaterial. Thank you very much for your offered help! Sorry, sorry I think my English confused a lot of infos... Cross-building stuff is just plain confusing. I'll try it again. Setup BEFORE I switched to 64bit Gentoo Linux. * a normal system gcc as installed by emerge usually on many (all?) gentoo systems... * a crosscompiling gcc in source form. Compiled with the normal gcc to an executable which runs on the 32bit Gentoo system and produces executables/kernel to run on the ATMEL AT91RM9200 (yes, you're right - this typo was mine ;) ). * Additional chuck audio application only available for 32bit Linux, also compiled with the normal gcc Wanted setup on my shiny new 64bit Gentoo Linux: * a normal system gcc as installed by emerge usually on many (all?) gentoo systems... (== already there and living quite well) * a crosscompiling gcc in source form. To be Compiled with the normal gcc to an executable which runs on the 64bit Gentoo system and produces executables/kernel to run on the ATMEL AT91RM9200 (yes, you're right - this typo was mine ;) ) . All you need to do is build a cross compiler for the ARM9 target the same way you did before. The width of the host where you're building things doesn't matter (if it does, that's a bug in gcc or binutils). I've had excellent results using the crosstool-ng makefile: http://ymorin.is-a-geek.org/projects/crosstool Crosstool is used by a lot of embedded developers. If there were problems building an ARM comiler on an AMD64 host, Yann Morin et al. are your best bet for a solution. You may want to take a look at the crossgcc mailing list: http://news.gmane.org/gmane.comp.gcc.cross-compiling http://sourceware.org/ml/crossgcc/ From a brief search of the mailing list, it appears that building an ARM compiler on an AMD64 machines works just fine. or, It's quite likely that you can install IA32 libraries on your AMD64 host OS and then use the exact same compiler executable you used before. OR: compiled to be an 32bit gcc-executable which generate executable binaries for my ATMEL cookie. As long a 64bit-executable of gcc can do the job I would prefer that solution of course. You really don't want to do that. It's rather tricky, and it shouldn't be required. * Additional chuck audio application only available for 32bit Linux, to be compiled with the normal gcc to be a 32 bit executable since not 64bit-ready. Just use the arm-linux-gcc compiler and you should be fine regardless of the width of the host on which you built the arm-linux-gcc compiler. -- Grant Edwards grant.b.edwardsYow! It's the RINSE CYCLE!! at They've ALL IGNORED the gmail.comRINSE CYCLE!! Hi Grant, thank you very much for your help again ! :) Life on planet AMD64 becomes easier ;) One question remains open to me: * How can I build 32bit applicationa to run on a 64bit Gentoo Linux (I have both /lib32 and /lib64 and /usr/lib32 and /usr/lib64) with the normal gcc (64 bit executable) on the 64bit Gentoo Linux. Is this trick possible? (Chuck is not 64bit ready...) Thank you very much for your help in advance! Best regards, mcc
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: How to compile for less bits :)
Cross compiling on unix is confusing because the compiler sucks. On Sep 29, 2010 3:50 PM, Grant Edwards grant.b.edwa...@gmail.com wrote: On 2010-09-29, meino.cra...@gmx.de meino.cra...@gmx.de wrote: (And in this context: The aud... Thank you very much for your offered help! Sorry, sorry I think my English confused a lot of i... Cross-building stuff is just plain confusing. I'll try it again. Setup BEFORE I switched to 64bit Gentoo Linux. * a normal system gcc a... All you need to do is build a cross compiler for the ARM9 target the same way you did before. The width of the host where you're building things doesn't matter (if it does, that's a bug in gcc or binutils). I've had excellent results using the crosstool-ng makefile: http://ymorin.is-a-geek.org/projects/crosstool Crosstool is used by a lot of embedded developers. If there were problems building an ARM comiler on an AMD64 host, Yann Morin et al. are your best bet for a solution. You may want to take a look at the crossgcc mailing list: http://news.gmane.org/gmane.comp.gcc.cross-compiling http://sourceware.org/ml/crossgcc/ From a brief search of the mailing list, it appears that building an ARM compiler on an AMD64 machines works just fine. or, It's quite likely that you can install IA32 libraries on your AMD64 host OS and then use the exact same compiler executable you used before. OR: compiled to be an 32bit gcc-executable which generate executable binaries for my ATMEL ... You really don't want to do that. It's rather tricky, and it shouldn't be required. * Additional chuck audio application only available for 32bit Linux, to be compiled with th... Just use the arm-linux-gcc compiler and you should be fine regardless of the width of the host on which you built the arm-linux-gcc compiler. -- Grant Edwards grant.b.edwardsYow! It's the RINSE CYCLE!! at They've ALL IGNORED the gmail.comRINSE CYCLE!!
[gentoo-user] Re: How to compile for less bits :)
On 2010-09-29, meino.cra...@gmx.de meino.cra...@gmx.de wrote: One question remains open to me: * How can I build 32bit applicationa to run on a 64bit Gentoo Linux (I have both /lib32 and /lib64 and /usr/lib32 and /usr/lib64) with the normal gcc (64 bit executable) on the 64bit Gentoo Linux. Is this trick possible? (Chuck is not 64bit ready...) That I don't know. I thought you wanted to build chuck for the ARM target. -- Grant
[gentoo-user] Re: How to compile for less bits :)
On 2010-09-29, Jacob Todd jaketodd...@gmail.com wrote: Cross compiling on unix is confusing because the compiler sucks. We're all looking forward to the better one that you're writing. ;) [I admine that gcc has its warts, but you evidently haven't dealt with some of the compilers I have.] -- Grant
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: How to compile for less bits :)
There's already great cross compilers on plan 9. No need to write a new one. On Sep 29, 2010 8:15 PM, Grant Edwards grant.b.edwa...@gmail.com wrote: On 2010-09-29, Jacob Todd jaketodd...@gmail.com wrote: Cross compiling on unix is confusing because the compiler sucks. We're all looking forward to the better one that you're writing. ;) [I admine that gcc has its warts, but you evidently haven't dealt with some of the compilers I have.] -- Grant
[gentoo-user] Re: How to compile for less bits :)
On 2010-09-27, meino.cra...@gmx.de meino.cra...@gmx.de wrote: For my microcontroller board (ATMEL AT81RM920, linux based) Do you mean AT91RM9200? I want to crosscompile kernels and applications on my 64bit Gentoo linux. That's easy enough. The source of a gcc (prepared on a 32bit system I fear) for the purpose of crosscompiling from a 32bit system-- target is the above mentioned processor -- is available. Is it possible to compile this gcc as a 32bit-application on my 64bit system to ensure the same behaviour as it would if to was built on a original 32bit Gentoo Linux? You want to compile gcc on an AMD64 machine and end up with a cross-compiler that runs as an IA32 app and generates code for an ARM9 target? That's called a Canadian Cross, and is rather tricky, since it involves three different architectures: building a compiler on architecture A (AMD64) to be run on architecture B (IA32) and generate code for architecture C (ARM9). Can you explain why you want that rather than a normal cross compiler? IOW, why do you want to build a gcc cross compiler that runs as a 32-bit application? It's _way_ simpler to build a normal cross compiler: building a compiler one architecture (AMD64) to be run on that same architecture (AMD64) and generate code for a second architecture (ARM9). (And in this context: The audio application chuck is only as 32bit application available currently. How is it possible to compile this on a 64bit system?) You use a compiler that generates code for a the desired 32-bit architecture. The width of the host is immaterial. The easiest way to build such a compiler is using crosstool-ng http://ymorin.is-a-geek.org/projects/crosstool Crosstool-NG does have some support for doing a Canadian-cross, but I don't see why you would want to do that. -- Grant Edwards grant.b.edwardsYow! Gibble, Gobble, we at ACCEPT YOU ... gmail.com
