Re: Running x86-64 debian inside i386 pbuilder on AMD64
Le vendredi 25 août 2006 à 11:09 +0200, Sander Marechal a écrit :
> Martin Wuertele wrote:
> > * Sander Marechal <s.marechal@jejik.com> [2006-08-25 07:39]:
> >
> >> Matthias Julius wrote:
> >>> pbuilder create --debootstrapopts --arch=amd64
> >> It didn't work after all. I got a kernel running, but debootstrap
> >> doesn't want to cooperate. It quits with an error that it cannot find a
> >> script. It takes a random string from the pbuilder configuration and
> >> tries lo look for a script at that place instead of
> >> /usr/lib/pbuilder/scripts. Weird.
> >
> > debootstrap in such environments works fine on debian etch and debian sid
> > systems and with a the debootstrap from backports.org even on debian
> > sarge systems.
>
> Maybe my debootstrap is simply too old. I'll compare versions.
>
> >> I think I'm going to take the easy way out and install a minimal dapper
> >> 64 in a small partition and use that to build amd64 binaries.
> >
> > If you look for support of ubuntu you have come to the wrong place.
> > http://www.ubuntu.com/support looks more appropriate.
>
> Hehe, you guys know far more than they do. They told me it wasn't
> possible to simply replace my k7 kernel with an amd64-k8 kernel untill I
Those kernels are 64-bits compiled with (only) 32-bits userland support.
> said "But I am running it right now and it works!". Let alone that they
> knew anything about amd64 pbuilder on a 32-bit system.
>
> Last question: How do the debian build servers do it? Do they have a
> build server for every architecture or is everything cross-compiled with
> architecture specific toolchains?
In Debian, by policy, every architecture is built on a native machine.
There is no cross-compilation involved. There would probably be lots of
problems with builds where some compiled-code would be needed to run on
an incompatible architecture.
For i386 and AMD64, on the contrary, there would be no problem.
> Thanks for all the help so far!
--
Jérôme Warnier <jwarnier@beeznest.net>
BeezNest
Reply to: