> Now I am trying to cross-compile some more ambitious code, and I'm > encountering difficulties. In particular it seems that the libstdc++ > that I built built is inferior to the native one; I think that configure > decided that some platform headers (sys/time.h, for example) were > missing and disabled some things. This is strange. Could you please post some details (what exactly you tried to compile, what is written to config.log when tests behave unexpectedly, ...)? > Trying to do this revealed another issue. It looks as if my > cross-compiler packages are dependent on the native gcc-base package: That's ok. Native gcc-3.3-base package just provides some files in /usr/share/doc/gcc-3.3-base directory, which are symlinked from cross-gcc package. This may look strange, but it is like native compiler package is organized, cross-compiler package tries to differ as little as possible. > I noticed this because the libstdc++ packages that I've converted from > the native build using dpkg-cross depend on gcc-3.3-base-armeb-cross, > and so refuse to install: OOPS. This is dpkg-cross misbehaviour. However, libstdc++ is not intended to be dpkg-cross'ed anyway, instead one built during cross-compiler package build should be used. > I wonder if this is a problem with dpkg-cross; should it have not > modified the gcc-base dependency? Or should I be forcing it using -A > and/or removedeps in /etc/dpkg-cross/cross-compile? gcc-3.3-base should be in keepdeps. I will add it to default version. Nikita
Attachment:
pgpJ23aH7bjQ2.pgp
Description: PGP signature