Re: [RFC] [Cross Toolchain] Multiarch and sysrooted toolchain
Hector Oron <email@example.com> writes:
>> The toolchain does not yet look in all the right places. Neither for
>> the multiarch nor the corss-compile way of putting the prefix. It is
>> in a state where both ways are used and neither is complete enough for
>> a full system.
> So, would it be fine to send an addendum to multiarch document
> taking into account cross environments?
> In case, we write up that file, preferred way for cross environments
> would be a sysroot <DIR>, where in multiarch do we fit our cross <DIR>
> ? Or we should just go for the splitted <DIR>/* option (which won't be
> useful until multiarch is ready) ?
There is no cross <DIR>, there is just <DIR>. The aim for multiarch is
to have a unique place for every library for every target. As the
<DIR> is already unique there is no need to change it for cross
compiling purposes. The same dir will work for native and cross
>>From cross toolchain point of view, i would suggest to stay with
> upstream maintainers layout, which would require a change on
> dpkg-cross, moving
> <DIR>/include into <DIR>/usr/include, that way we would be able to export <DIR>.
Would that mean moving /usr/include/x86_64-linux-gnu/ into
Instead of moving you could just change the sysroot from
/usr/x86_64-linux-gnu to /.
And yes, for exporting it would mean exporting /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu,
/usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu and /usr/include/x86_64-linux-gnu.
>  http://lackof.org/taggart/hacking/multiarch/