> Are you saying this actually works for you (building everything, not just
> the tools)?
To build everything, I need to tweak a couple of extra bits (in the
attached patch). I'm somewhat wary about statements regarding
anything build-related, because I know everyone has a different
approach and it runs in a different environment. With the both first
patch and the attached, everything builds for me for both
XEN_TARGET_ARCH=x86_32 and x86_64 in my 64-bit environment.
> I do cross builds too, but generally the other way around (64-bit
> build on 32-bit host), and hence need to only cross-build the
> hypervisor to put underneath everything.
>
> I can't seem to find an ld (native or cross) that would accept -m32,
> -march=i686, ...
I think I had the same thing happen to me that happened to Ian (-m32
-melf_x86_64 ... so no errors).
If the LDFLAGS / LDFLAGS_INDIRECT stuff is messy, my previous approach
has been to add $(CFLAGS) to all the link steps in the tools (i.e.
lib*, xl, etc.) so that the approach architecture flags would be
passed to gcc for linking. I don't mind going through and doing that
until everything builds smoothly for 32-bit target on 64-bit, provided
that's a friendly solution. It would be great to be able to stop using
a set of build patches at the bottom of my queue. :)
Cheers,
-Adin
cross-compile-fixes.patch
Description: Binary data
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
|
Home