On Tue, 2018-09-04 at 01:39 +0800, Casper Ti. Vector wrote: > Although I have tried neither of lh-bootstrap or mkroot , I > noticed that the toolchains of the former is nearly one > magnitude smaller than those  of the latter, while both > seem to be based on musl and statically linked. > >  <https://github.com/landley/mkroot>. >  <https://b.zv.io/mcm/bin/>. > > Out of curiosity, may I ask what is the cause of this huge > difference?
The ones in  are not stripped, and that accounts for most of the size discrepancy. I will ask Rob to consider adding that to his 'mcm-buildall.sh' script. I simply build/host binaries. > Additionally, is there a possibility that the two projects > join forces, so one becomes an add-on to the other, and > minimising wheel reinvention? > As far as musl-cross-make goes, those are currently GCC 6.4.0 and there are concerns that 7.x and 8.x may have introduced regressions. Several versions   are of course available on skarnet.org, so that's fine. Once musl 1.1.20 drops we'll have m68k too. The mkroot/mcm toolchains follow directly from  and at the moment we don't interfere with that process at all. The other difference is that all of the cross toolchains in  are i686 while Laurent's are x86_64 only. So at the moment there does not appear to be any wheel problem. I like the idea of combining efforts to offer a consistent, wide selection of static toolchains and possibly additional tooling such as static QEMU, MinGW, others (not just what's on my site). ZV : https://skarnet.org/toolchains/native/ : https://skarnet.org/toolchains/cross/ : https://b.zv.io/mcm/bin/ : https://github.com/richfelker/musl-cross-make