Re: [RFC] [Cross Toolchain] Multiarch and sysrooted toolchain
>> The question is
>>
>> /arm-linux-gnu/lib/libfoo.so
> l> /usr/arm-linux-gnu/[usr/]lib/libbla.so
>> /usr/arm-linux-gnu/[usr/]include/foo.h
>>
>> or
>>
>> /lib/arm-linux-gnu/libfoo.so
>> /usr/lib/arm-linux-gnu/libbla.so
>> /usr/include/arm-linux-gnu/foo.h
>>
>> It has always been a question of where to put the tripplet, not
>> whether or not to have an extra subdir below that. Although I'm
>> against the subdirs. No need to duplicate that this is "usr".
>
> I'd agree - [usr] below $arch-linux-gnu appears redundant to me. The
> only difference between /lib and /usr/lib/ relates to the libraries
> required to boot before /usr is mounted. That reasoning doesn't apply
> to toolchain issues.
>
When building cross compilers, it is recommended to use sysroot, and
it demands that [usr/]include, but not for lib nor bin.
So, from my PoV i would move include/ to usr/include/ in dpkg-cross.
And for the multiarch design, i would keep what mainstream binutils,
gcc has designed.
So if we want to have a multilib'd cross compiler, we need to add that
unsignificant [usr/] other way we need to fool arround patching stuff
and not being mainstream compatible.
Another issues i am thinking about are the emul/ia32-linux i believe
that is scheduled to disapear soon and we are also forgetting mips
tri-arch.
I have updated http://wiki.debian.org/toolchain-multiarch with posible
paths, please feel free to edit.
Regards
--
Héctor Orón
Reply to: