Re: Question about static compiling

[Manoel]

Even if are using a 64-bit system you can still have 32-bit libraries.
I'm not sure about it bur I think the configure script will take care of
all flags for you.

On Sat, 2008-10-25 at 09:47 -0600, Joe Lewis wrote:
> Hello, folks;
> 
> I joined this list as I have been unable to find a solution that I agree 
> with on a simple question.  This should be short, and an answer should 
> help others to find solutions through searching.  My simple question is 
> - how do I compile a static form of grub2?
> 
> The background - I am trying to create my own LFS system on a dual 
> quad-core Xeon (x86_64), and the LFS turns out to be a pure-64 bit 
> environment.  I am unable to compile grub, as it requires a 32 bit libc, 
> and everything I find about grub shows I will have to use a statically 
> compiled version.  My research (mailing list, google, etc) only revealed 
> setting the enviroment variable for the CFLAGS with a -static, but that 
> STILL resulted in the binaries holding a reference to /lib/ld-linux.so, 
> which doesn't exist in a true 64 bit environment - it is 
> /lib/ld-linux-x86_64.so .  And, since it is a 64 bit environment, the 
> "static" binaries complain about a corrupt shared object if one just 
> slaps a symlink in there (I've tried everything I can think of).
> 
> I finally hit a wall, and I do not know where to look next.  Has anyone 
> built grub2 on another platform for use in an LFS pure-64 bit 
> environment?  Has anyone successfully compiled grub2 in a 64 bit 
> environment (I doubt this, but it doesn't hurt to ask) ?  I'd be willing 
> to act as a guinea pig if anyone has some patches to test with, etc.  I 
> had the svn version of 1886.
> 
> Many thanks for taking the time to read this,
> Joe
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Grub-devel mailing list
> address@hidden
> http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/grub-devel
-- 
Best Regards,

Manoel Abranches <address@hidden>
IBM Linux Technology Center Brazil