On 24.08.2015 19:01, Chris Staub wrote:
On 08/24/2015 12:48 PM, Tim Tassonis wrote:
On 24.08.2015 18:12, Chris Staub wrote:
On 08/24/2015 08:27 AM, Tim Tassonis wrote:
Hi all
I've successully build an 64-bit lfs/blfs system that also runs very
nicely and leaves next to nothing desired.
Sadly, I'm getting to the point of having to use some binary-only stuff
like skype and printer drivers that only exist in 32-bit variants,
forcing me to have some sort of multiarch support in order to run them.
I'm aware of the clfs project, but at first look, it only describes the
construction of a whole cross-compiled system, while I hope I can get
away with a little less work, like maybe only gcc,binutils,glibc and
then some additional libraries required by the programs.
Does anybody know of a description how to achieve this?
Kind regards
Tim
Could just use CLFS and leave out whichever 32-bit libraries you don't
need.
I assume there's a lot more one can leave out:
- flex
- bison
- sed
- e2fsprogs
- coreutils
- iproute2
and on and on. As I see it, you wont need any additional 32-bit programs
to run 32-bit apps on a 64-bit system, even if the application calls
one. So, I assume, 80 of even the basic system software stuff in clfs
can be dropped. Just not really sure about which ones are really needed
and how to setup the dynamic loader stuff.
Dynamic loader setup shouldn't be any different, just skip installation
of whatever 32-bit libraries you don't think you need and you should be
good.
Also, CLFS multilib only installs 32-bit *libraries* - any packages that
don't install libraries are never built for 32 bits at all (such as sed
and iproute2).
Ok, sorry, I was looking at the wrong CLFS page, I now found the one
multilib one and see what you mean. Still, I already have a "native"
lfs/blfs 64-bit system and was hoping that there's an easy way to
convert this to a multilib system without redoing all the already
installed 64-bit stuff.
--
http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/lfs-support
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Do not top post on this list.
A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
A: Top-posting.
Q: What is the most annoying thing in e-mail?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style
