RE: GCC cross-compilation
I see. But I do not totally agree. We're used to do SCO development on
theLinux box and it works like a charm.
Dr. Michael Meskes, Projekt-Manager | topsystem Systemhaus GmbH
firstname.lastname@example.org | Europark A2, Adenauerstr. 20
email@example.com | 52146 Wuerselen
Go SF49ers! Go Rhein Fire! | Tel: (+49) 2405/4670-44
Use Debian GNU/Linux! | Fax: (+49) 2405/4670-10
>From: Galen Hazelwood [SMTP:firstname.lastname@example.org]
>Sent: Tuesday, June 24, 1997 12:55 AM
>To: Michael Meskes
>Subject: Re: GCC cross-compilation
>Michael Meskes wrote:
>> Does this mean I could upload all architecture version for my packages?
>> If so yes, I think it's useful.
>Well, I personally distrust cross-compilers...at least gcc cross
>compilers. I know that at least one crossover (i386->alpha) has been
>known to produce broken binaries at one time, and how can you tell when
>the next such disaster will be? Since you can't actually test the
>cross-compiled programs you generated, you never know when you might be
>uploading something _really_ broken into stable.
>Cross compilers are very good for bootstrapping new linux ports and
>things like that, but I wouldn't want to upload "production binaries"
>built by a cross-compiler, and would be _very_ upset to find that I was
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
Trouble? e-mail to email@example.com .