Re: qemu/Scratchbox ideas
In message <[🔎] 4097A971.2070204@poli.usp.br>
Eduardo Correia <eduardo.correia@poli.usp.br> wrote:
> I did not get this discussion from the beginning, so...
There was no beginning as such. This post relates the entire substance
of the issue.
> The compilation of an entire system can take a loooong time, so I
> set a basic image server which mounts a NFS root and I put the
> thinclients to compile the system themselves. I do this using distcc &
> ccache.
> I think that compiling inside an emulated enviroment is not the best
> choice because you loose a lot of flexibility given by these and a lot
> of others tools.
You mean "lose". But I don't understand this statement. The
environment is not emulated in any real sense, only the actual ARM code
in the binaries. If anything, Scratchbox has more emulation, hence its
greater complexity.
In any case, the tools you might run in an ARM chroot would be
precisely the same as you would have in a parent x86 enviroment -
there's no loss of functionality (qemu deficienies aside).
[snip entire quoted post]
--
Peter Naulls - peter@chocky.org | http://www.chocky.org/
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unix Programs on RISC OS | http://www.chocky.org/unix/
Reply to: