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

Unidentified subject!

> Now I am trying to cross-compile some more ambitious code, and I'm
> encountering difficulties.  In particular it seems that the libstdc++
> that I built built is inferior to the native one; I think that configure
> decided that some platform headers (sys/time.h, for example) were
> missing and disabled some things.

This is strange.
Could you please post some details (what exactly you tried to compile, what 
is written to config.log when tests behave unexpectedly, ...)?

> Trying to do this revealed another issue.  It looks as if my
> cross-compiler packages are dependent on the native gcc-base package:

That's ok.
Native gcc-3.3-base package just provides some files in 
/usr/share/doc/gcc-3.3-base directory, which are symlinked from cross-gcc 
package. This may look strange, but it is like native compiler package is 
organized, cross-compiler package tries to differ as little as possible.

> I noticed this because the libstdc++ packages that I've converted from
> the native build using dpkg-cross depend on gcc-3.3-base-armeb-cross,
> and so refuse to install:

OOPS. This is dpkg-cross misbehaviour.
However, libstdc++ is not intended to be dpkg-cross'ed anyway, instead one 
built during cross-compiler package build should be used.

> I wonder if this is a problem with dpkg-cross; should it have not
> modified the gcc-base dependency?  Or should I be forcing it using -A
> and/or removedeps in /etc/dpkg-cross/cross-compile?

gcc-3.3-base should be in keepdeps. I will add it to default version.


Attachment: pgpJ23aH7bjQ2.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply to: