> Yes, but the argument against cross-compiling has always been stronger > - If you are compiling under an emulator, you can at least test the > produced binaries under that same emulator, and you have a high degree > of confidence that they work reliably (this is, if an emulator bug > leads to gcc miscompiling, it'd be surprising if it allowed for > running under the emulator). Using cross-compilers you can't really > test it. And, also an important point, you can potentially come up > with a resulting package you could not generate in the target > architecture. > You can always run generated binaries on an emulator or a target board for testing. I have cross compiled a lot of code using gcc and have yet to see wrong binaries caused by cross compiling versus native compiling. I could imagine problems with floating point expressions evaluated at compile time and resulting in slightly different results. The only way to see if cross compiling generates wrong binaries, is to try it and evaluate the results. > But, yes, I'd accept a cross-compiler as a solution as well in case we > could not run an emulator for a given slow platform. We will probably need both as some build scripts run generated code. Cheers, Peter (p2).
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature