| 1 |
On Saturday 31 July 2004 04:32 am, Jason Stubbs wrote: |
| 2 |
> Well, the idea was that to create local USE flags of the form cc-${ARCH}, |
| 3 |
> have the gcc ebuilds use them to configure the cross compiler and also have |
| 4 |
> them control the the slot. The only real difference to what there is now |
| 5 |
> would be that portage would be able to forecast the SLOT correctly. |
| 6 |
|
| 7 |
so the user would do USE="cc-arm" to get an arm cross compiler ? |
| 8 |
|
| 9 |
and then in the ebuild we'd have to do something like: |
| 10 |
SLOT="cc-arm? ( blah )" ? |
| 11 |
how'd would we specify a default slot ? |
| 12 |
|
| 13 |
> If you're asking about using portage itself to do the cross-compiling, well |
| 14 |
> we're still a ways from that I think. Isn't the main issue there that |
| 15 |
> packages link against / instead of ${ROOT}? |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
a few things / ideas ... |
| 18 |
- you wouldnt merge the cross compiler to $ROOT, you would merge it to / |
| 19 |
- it would be impossible to link against things in / since those libraries are |
| 20 |
of a different format |
| 21 |
- i believe cross compilers have a diff linking / include / etc... path setup |
| 22 |
- if we start supporting $LDFLAGS more, this will be easier :) |
| 23 |
-mike |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
-- |
| 26 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |
Archives