[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Cross-compilation check broken
From: |
Robert Millan |
Subject: |
Re: Cross-compilation check broken |
Date: |
Thu, 29 Jan 2009 14:07:37 +0100 |
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.5.13 (2006-08-11) |
On Wed, Jan 28, 2009 at 09:14:34PM -0500, Pavel Roskin wrote:
> Hello, Robert!
>
> Your commit 1955 breaks my script for testing PowerPC. That's the
> script:
>
> #!/bin/sh
> set -e
> CROSS_PATH=/home/proski/src/buildroot/build_powerpc/staging_dir/usr/bin
> PATH=$CROSS_PATH:$PATH
> ./configure --with-platform=ieee1275 --target=powerpc-linux
> make -j2
> ./grub-mkrescue --grub-mkimage=./grub-mkelfimage --pkglibdir=. grub.iso
> qemu-system-ppc -nographic -cdrom grub.iso -boot d
>
> I compile for target "powerpc-linux" and I have powerpc-linux-gcc in the
> PATH. However, I'm using native tools. I'm not interested in running
> tools in an emulator (actually, I have another script that does it).
> Therefore, build and host are the same, so TARGET_CC is set to gcc.
>
> The new check must be wrong. TARGET_CC is used to build executables for
> the target system. It should be found using the specified target even
> if the tools are compiled natively.
>
> Actually, the original check wasn't particularly good. Maybe we could
> check if target_alias is defined? Or maybe we could always check for
> TARGET_CC?
Hi Pavel,
This check looks really confusing. I naively assumed it was checking if we're
cross-compiling like the comment said ;-)
But if it really meant to compare target with host, I think it should be:
if test "x$target_cpu" != "x$host_cpu"; then
rather than what was before:
if test "x$target" != "x$host"; then
Since "$target_os" has no real meaning. Does that work for you?
--
Robert Millan
The DRM opt-in fallacy: "Your data belongs to us. We will decide when (and
how) you may access your data; but nobody's threatening your freedom: we
still allow you to remove your data and not access it at all."