Fedora and Cross Compiling

Hans de Goede j.w.r.degoede at hhs.nl
Wed Jun 13 08:08:39 UTC 2007


Andy Green wrote:
> Hans de Goede wrote:
> 
>> You don't get my objectino, I'm crossing from Fedora but not too Fedora,
>> therefore what is in Fedora's specfile is completely irrelevant. Extreme
>> example, the sdcc cross-compiler already in Fedora. This crosses from
>> Fedora to 8051 (and other) microcontrollers. It uses its own assembler
>> and is its own C-compiler, binutils and gcc are not used at all (except
>> for building the asm / compiler themselves, duh). Should the sdcc
>> specfile be a pathc on top of gcc's specfile, a patch effectively
>> replacing 100% of it, just because its a c-compiler too?
> 
> Should Fedora packages have to deal with it at all "just because its a
> c-compiler too?"  I think the scenario of striving to be able to build
> glibc for 8051 on sdcc needs to be triaged into a different discussion.
> 

I'm not talking about building glibc for 8051 (that would be kinda hard as an 
average 8051 comes with 256 bytes of ram, and no I didn't forget an K or M there).

What I'm saying that using the same spec for sdcc and gcc makes no sense, iow 
that when crossing to something not fedora using Fedora's specs as a base makes 
no sense, because for example we might be dealing with a different compiler 
(version).

Please read my reply to David Woodhouse.

> What seems to be in the world of the possible is to retrofit the Fedora
> - Fedora cross case into what exists already.  The benefits that fall
> out of that in terms of regularizing upstreams for cross and making
> definitive cross recipes (for gcc anyway!) will only help everyone else.
> 

Agreed, all that I'm saying is that the one spec file (with or without 
overlays) might be a good idea for Fedora-Fedora crosses, but is not for 
Fedora-Foo crosses.

Regards,

Hans




More information about the fedora-devel-list mailing list