Re: Moving along Pure64
On Thu, Apr 01, 2004 at 01:09:08PM -0700, Greg Johnson wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 01, 2004 at 10:38:21AM -0600, John Goerzen wrote:
> > Hi,
> > We need a few things to happen to get pure64 going better.
> > At the top of the list is a gcc that can build 32- and 64-bit binaries
> > but defaults to 64-bit mode. This is more difficult than it may appear
> > at first.
> I was able to build a working cross compiler for building 32bit binaries
> on x64-64. The existing binutils are already biarch. Unfortunately,
> the harddrive my cross compiler was on failed. If anybody's interested,
> I might be able to recreate it.
That would be excellent.
> With the cross compiler, I could build a 64 bit kernel with 32 bit support.
> The kernel (2.6.x) actually only has one C file that needs to be
> compiled in 32bit mode. That file is arch/x86_64/boot/compressed/misc.c
Does that hold if one wants to run 32-bit binaries also?
> All the other 32bit objects are generated from assembly files which our
> as can already handle. The kernel makefiles have to be fixed, though to
> call as rather than gcc for the .S files.
Ah, that could be an issue to.
> BTW, is the biarch gcc necessary for anything other than the kernel?
No, unless it requires a 32-bit libc.