Re: Packages difference in different slink arches (was Re: slinkcd v0.95 m68k & Alpha organization)
David Starner <dstarner98@aasaa.ofe.org> writes:
> > > gcc-m68k-linux: Linux <non-m68k arch> host, Linux m68k (m68k-linux)
> > > target cross-compiler.
> >
> > ditto.
>
> This one could be ported to Hurd, so Linux <non-m68k arch> might not be
> valid if some chooses to do so.
Joel Klecker wrote the above description - the package description is:
Description: The GNU C compiler for cross compiling m68k-linux binaries.
This package may be used to cross compile programs for Linux/m68k.
The GNU C compiler is a fairly portable optimizing compiler that
supports multiple languages. It includes (runtime) support for C,
C++, and Objective C (support for Objective C was donated by NeXT).
This package includes cpp, the GNU C preprocessor.
There is nothing linux specific about the host architecture in the source
code itself, but my rules file does:
ARCH = $(shell dpkg --print-gnu-build-architecture)
...
./configure --prefix=/usr --target=m68k-linux --host=$(ARCH)-linux
I think we need a dpkg --print-gnu-build-os or similar function so I can
remove the linux dependency in the --host parameter. Or would the output
of uname be sufficient? Any thoughts on this, hurd developers?
> What's a better name for a cross-compiler package?
> gcc-crosscompiler-m68k-linux comes to mind, but that's very long for a
> package name. The current names are unambiguous, and already in use.
That name is too long IMO.
Martin.
Reply to: