| 1 |
Am 04.01.2011 20:47, schrieb wireless: |
| 2 |
> On 01/03/11 16:11, Christoph Spielmann wrote: |
| 3 |
> |
| 4 |
>> Well in terms of crossdev i686-gentoo-linux-gnu-gcc is not a valid |
| 5 |
>> target (just look at the output of crossdev --help). If you want to |
| 6 |
>> build x86-code on a machine using a x86-compiler why would you want to |
| 7 |
>> use a cross-compilation-environment anyway? The idea of using |
| 8 |
>> cross-compilation is to build stuff for another target than the target |
| 9 |
>> of the host-compiler... E.g. build arm-code on a x86-machine or compile |
| 10 |
>> stuff for ppc on a x86-64-machine. |
| 11 |
> |
| 12 |
> OK I agree with this answer, mostly. |
| 13 |
> |
| 14 |
> I have a situation where a x86 (P4) Machine is built on i686 for |
| 15 |
> everything. However, I'm also going to chroot the machine and build |
| 16 |
> binaries for all sorts of i486/586 and old oddball processors such as |
| 17 |
> the Geode. |
| 18 |
> |
| 19 |
> So isn't that a valid exception to what you have opined about? |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
Okey but all these things are in the end x86-processors. Some support |
| 22 |
flags that other's won't but in the end they are basically all the same |
| 23 |
arch. So my suggestion would've been: use a chroot-environment for such |
| 24 |
a case. |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
In my eyes it only makes sense to use cross-compilation (including all |
| 27 |
the hassles that you will come across by using it) if you need (or want) |
| 28 |
to build stuff for another architecture or machine, that is not |
| 29 |
powerfull enough for compilation tasks itself. E.g. arm5-code on a |
| 30 |
x86_64-environment |
| 31 |
|
| 32 |
> |
| 33 |
> curious, |
| 34 |
> James |
| 35 |
> |
| 36 |
> |
| 37 |
> |
Archives