On Tue, Mar 17, 2026 at 10:52 AM Josh Poimboeuf <[email protected]> wrote:
[...]
> >
> > Yeah, I think that would be a good idea. Will do that for v2.
>
> So, in general ARCH is complicated. For example:
>
> - ARCH=arm64 would never match "uname -m" (aarch64)
> - ARCH=i386 would use the same gcc binary (no cross-compiler needed)
> - I'm sure there are many other edge cases...
Agreed. I haven't worked with i386 for a long time, but I did notice
the arm64 vs. aarch64 difference.
> Instead of a manual error, it may be simpler to just let the build fail
> naturally if the user doesn't set the right ARCH.
>
> Though, I think the check can be improved slightly, as ARCH is a
> reasonably good indicator that cross-compiling is happening. So I can
> at least add an ARCH check at the beginning like so?
>
> cross_compile_init() {
> if [[ ! -v ARCH ]]; then
> OBJCOPY=objcopy
> return 0
> fi
>
> if [[ -v LLVM ]]; then
> OBJCOPY=llvm-objcopy
> else
> OBJCOPY="${CROSS_COMPILE:-}objcopy"
> fi
> }
Do we need ARCH when CROSS_COMPILE is set? I was
under the impression that CROSS_COMPILE doesn't require
ARCH.
Thanks,
Song
