[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: new very alpha release of future Emdebian tools...


> > crossbase = /usr
> > crossbin = /usr/arm-linux-uclibc/bin/
> > crossprefix = /usr/arm-linux-uclibc/bin/arm-linux-uclibc-
> Why do you have to set that long 'crossprefix'?  Shouldn't just
> 'arm-linux-uclibc-' do?

Indeed arm-linux-uclibc- should do. It was just out of habit (and the fact I
copy pasted it from "which")

> Also, won't that request 'arm-linux-uclibc-ld' & co?  In theory it
> should ...

It does, and I believe this is correct. This makes sure you are linking with
the uClibc libc from the toolchain.

> > And then compile the package with dpkg-buildpackage -b -aarm -rfakeroot,
> I plan to implement 'arm-uclibc' architecture (and other *-uclibc
> architectures) that will do cross-compilation with uclibc at dpkg-cross
> level.  However, I can't predict when I'll have the time :).

That would be great, but I already noticed it will take a fair amount of work.
And the necessary packages for uClibc.

> > Other known bug is in dh_shlibdeps if you compile with an non glibc
> > toolchain. It will nicely find the used libs, but no package that
> > contains it, throwing an error.
> Actually it is dpkg-shlibdeps, not dh_ wrapper. It just does not have
> appropriate shlibs file. You may add information
> to /etc/dpkg-shlibs.override to workaround this.

Indeed you are correct there. It is not the shlibs helper that causes the
problem... The easy, lazy and not so good work-around is just ignoring it for
the moment (thus uncommmenting it out in the (em)debian/rules file.)

Thank you for the comments,


| Philippe De Swert
| Stag developer http://stag.mind.be/
| Emdebian developer: http://www.emdebian.org
| Please do not send me documents in a closed format.
| Use the open alternatives. (*.pdf,*.ps,*.html,*.txt)
| http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html  

NOTE! My email address is changing to ... @scarlet.be
Please make the necessary changes in your address book. 

Reply to: