[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20160504115242.GX22574@port70.net>
Date: Wed, 4 May 2016 13:52:43 +0200
From: Szabolcs Nagy <nsz@...t70.net>
To: musl@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: Re: Re: [J-core] musl-cross-make / litecross improvements
* Laurent Bercot <ska-dietlibc@...rnet.org> [2016-05-04 13:27:22 +0200]:
> On 04/05/2016 13:10, Szabolcs Nagy wrote:
> >>Still no native toolchains. :)
> >>
> >
> >for native you need a musl based host
> >at which point you can use a musl based
> >distro that provides native toolchains.
>
> Huh? And what if you *are* the musl-based distro and need to build said
> native toolchain?
> I'm surprised to hear you, of all people, mentioning "relying on your distro"
> as a solution. :P
>
> I've had success, with the previous iteration of musl-cross-make,
> building native toolchains via disabling --host in COMMON_CONFIG
> (and compiling gmp, mpfr and mpc for the target first). In other words,
> host=target (even if build!=host). They're still considered cross-toolchains,
> as in the binaries are prefixed with ${ARCH}- , but they work. I'm not sure
> whether it's still possible with the current version of mcm.
yes, that works, you can cross build a toolchain with host==target
and then it will be a native toolchain.
(i havent tried it with mcm, but first you build a cross toolchain
and then you should be able to use that to build the native one.)
what i meant was that you can only use that toolchain in a native
musl environment and for most users that's a distro with its own
toolchain (otherwise you have to build busybox etc yourself).
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use?
Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia
and check out these
guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.
