Joe Ciccone: > Roman I Khimov wrote: > > I think there is a misunderstanding here. :) What I see currently in > > CLFS and CBLFS is that we cross-compile some basic temporary system > > just to boot/chroot into it and then compile natively everything on > > target. Second part doesn't differ that much from LFS/BLFS. What I want > > to see is full cross-compilation, every package builds on some build > > machine for target machine and the result is not something temporary > > but final system. > > That would be very cool. I managed to cross-compile openssh (openssl) > and through all the dependencies for gtk+-2 when I got stuck. I suppose > the next time I do that I'll document it. Hopefully, it will get big > enough for a book. I don't think a wiki, like cblfs, would be > appropriate for it. Since there are so many critical parts to a build > like this. A lot of the times you need to compile a package twice to > build binaries that are run during the build.
Yeah, I sure know this, because I did such compile for one project. It
should be noted though, that it was was based on Fedora Core 5 packages and
used rpmbuild for building. Still that required lots of patches plus some
more utilities for cross-toolchain. One of the most interesting things is
build machine's pkg-config that doesn't work at all for cross-compilation
without patching.
My build used some ugly hacks, because I've just had no time to fix
everything properly, that's why I'm very interested in a book that would
show how to "do the right thing" (c). I can even help in writing one,
although I'm very busy currently with other stuff.
And I remember when I was starting that project I've hit CLFS and have asked
myself a question - "why only temporary system is cross-compiled?".
Finished that I knew why, because it's hell. Even there is such a good
thing like autobuild, it looks like only GNU folks know how to use it
right. :)
> I think we could integrate this kind of information into cblfs, if we
> wanted to, but it would probably just clutter up the pages more then
> they'd need to be.
To me that is just what CLFS and BCLFS (or CBLFS, doesn't matter) should be.
Yeah, it's hard, but it's a real cross-environment from scratch.
--
Roman
http://roman.khimov.ru .o.
mailto: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ..o
gpg --recv-keys 0xE5E055C3 --keyserver hkp://subkeys.pgp.net ooo
pgpXe5no5KR0y.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ Clfs-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.cross-lfs.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/clfs-dev
