This is the mail archive of the crossgcc@sources.redhat.com mailing list for the crossgcc project.
See the CrossGCC FAQ for lots more information.
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |
Other format: | [Raw text] |
On Tue, 2004-07-27 at 19:23, Daniel Kegel wrote: > Daniel Kegel wrote: > > Ralf Corsepius wrote: > > > >>> (I still don't know how to > >>> make a single .SRPM for multiple targets, though. > >> > >> > >> It's darn complicated ;) > >> > >>> From my experience (I am the author of the RTEMS cross toolchain > >> > >> rpm-specs), if you really want to provide a single SRPM, you probably > >> will have to resort to passing the target via rpm-defines > >> (rpmbuild --define 'xtarget xxxx'). > > > > > > Oooh, then there's also the --target flag. Maybe that's the standard > > way to do it... > > No, darn it, that's for setting the host system type. Exactly. RPMS --target corresponds to a cross compiler's --host. ... but, then ... ... there is rpm's %build, which is something completely different than --build. ... different rpm/rpmbuild implementations contain several hard-coded assumptions on the host into it (esp. on RH/FC), e.g. %target and %target_platform are hard-code into some versions of rpm, not worth mentioning brp-strip related issues (RH/FC's implementation is not able to handle foreign binaries, such as target libs.) ... different rpm/rpmbuild implementations (e.g. RH/FC) are not able to handle installations to outside of "/" or "/usr" (e.g. "/opt"). > How confusing. > So in the final solution, one would use --target to set what machine > the compilers will run on, Theoretically, yes. However, I've never managed to get this working - the hard-coded stuff has always broken something somewhere (Some versions of rpm/rpmbuild do not even correctly evaluate the searchpath for rpm-macros.). > and --define 'realtarget powerpc-405-linux-gnu' > to set what machine that compilers will generate code for. Yes, sounds reasonable to me. Similar problems exist with passing a cross-compilers system to rpm for 3-leaf Canadian Crosses ;) > I'm going to skip all that for today, but keep it in mind for later. Ralf ------ Want more information? See the CrossGCC FAQ, http://www.objsw.com/CrossGCC/ Want to unsubscribe? Send a note to crossgcc-unsubscribe@sources.redhat.com
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |