Cross-compilers.

[Philip Balister]

If you are really serious about using cross compilers, take a look at 
OpenEmbedded (http://www.www.openembedded.org) OE addresses the 
toolchain and the other 99.9% of the problem.

Philip

Erwin Rol wrote:
> On Wed, 2006-08-02 at 15:21 -0500, Clark Williams wrote:
> 
>>-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>>Hash: SHA1
>>- From the responses you got, I'd say there's a fair amount of interest.
>>
>>What do you think about starting small (e.g. generating a mesh of FC x
>>FC compilers)? Starting with an FC target would mean that we could use
>>packages we know already work in the Fedora framework. It would just
>>be a matter of making a specfile (or series of specfiles) that are
>>cross-friendly to build and package gcc, binutils, glibc and gdb.
>>I've done that a few times and while it's not exactly pretty, it's
>>doable. We could generate x86, x86_64, and PPC hosted toolchains for
>>x86, x86_64 and PPC and then be able to build say PPC packages from an
>>x86_64 (the immediate benefactor would probably be the build system).
>>Of course after getting the toolchains packaged, it's a matter of
>>asking the maintainers to keep their specfiles cross friendly, but if
>>they'll take patches, we can clean that up.
> 
> 
> It is way more than just keeping their specfiles cross friendly. Most
> larger projects, like Xorg, are a bitch to crosscompile, and almost all
> need a lot of tuning before even './configure' works. The ones without
> configure will probably even more work to get obscure Makefiles to do
> cross compiling. 
> 
> The cross compiler part is less than 0.1% of the problem.
> 
> - Erwin
> 
> 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/x-pkcs7-signature
Size: 3303 bytes
Desc: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/attachments/20060802/e8f06bf0/attachment.bin>