[OT] making software easily cross-compilable

Kristoffer Ericson kristoffer_e1@hotmail.com
Sat Apr 29 02:30:00 GMT 2006


Not sure if this is what you are after but, just install scratchbox then you 
can do a simple
./configure, make, make install (destdir=??).

Best wishes

>From: "Robert P. J. Day" <rpjday@mindspring.com>
>To: crossgcc list <crossgcc@sources.redhat.com>
>Subject: [OT] making software easily cross-compilable
>Date: Fri, 28 Apr 2006 07:08:16 -0400 (EDT)
>   (not crosstool-related, but i figure this is the best place to find
>the appropriate expertise.)
>   every so often, i come across some software that i would like to
>cross compile with my toolchain, but that software is *so* not
>designed for cross-compilation.
>   while much of it will, conveniently, have a Makefile to direct the
>build process, in the extreme case, that Makefile will literally
>hardcode references to the tools, like "gcc", "ld" and so on.  grrrrrr
>   slightly more conveniently, the Makefile might at least do something
>   CC = gcc
>   LD = ld
>   STRIP = strip
>and so on, so one can override the variables with the corresponding
>cross-compile values.
>   even more generally, the build process might need access to *both*
>the cross-compile tools and the native tools (like the linux kernel
>does), so you might see:
>   CC := ${CROSS_COMPILE}cc
>   LD := ${CROSS_COMPILE}ld
>and another set for the native tools:
>   HOSTCC = gcc
>   HOSTLD = ld
>   what approach do people here use?  that is, if i don't want to get
>into major pain with autotools and so on, is there a preferred way to
>make your software easily cross-compilable?  is there a *standard* way
>to do it?  thanks.
>For unsubscribe information see http://sourceware.org/lists.html#faq

For unsubscribe information see http://sourceware.org/lists.html#faq

More information about the crossgcc mailing list