> Well, I personally distrust cross-compilers...at least gcc cross > compilers. I know that at least one crossover (i386->alpha) has been > known to produce broken binaries at one time,
In that case, 32/64 bit stuff has been the cause... > Since you can't actually test the cross-compiled programs you > generated, you never know when you might be uploading something > _really_ broken into stable. > > Cross compilers are very good for bootstrapping new linux ports and > things like that, but I wouldn't want to upload "production > binaries" built by a cross-compiler, and would be _very_ upset to > find that I was using one. I use cross-compiling most of the time for m68k, just because the Intel machines are much faster... But I test the resulting packages on the 68k machine :-) In that case, I think there's nothing to say against cross-compiling... BTW, what really doesn't work with cross-compiling is floating point, due to deficiencies in gcc. But you can avoid problems if you use the standard <float.h> installed with a cross-gcc. That one just contains an #error, so you'll be notified at compile time. Roman -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
