Date: Thu, 1 Dec 2011 09:12:45 -0700 From: Warner Losh <imp@bsdimp.com> To: Adrian Chadd <adrian@FreeBSD.org> Cc: freebsd-embedded@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: Ports cross-compilation Message-ID: <3B91BA0A-F5E8-4C57-8F09-0583B375C6D9@bsdimp.com> In-Reply-To: <CAJ-VmonE6twJ519k=Q1_R9RNYi4ZP19kjYh7yBB5mrUtG9iEgQ@mail.gmail.com> References: <4ED6FD47.6050704@bluezbox.com> <96407605-79A9-4AE3-AC2F-13BD97943153@lassitu.de> <447CC818-CEA3-46B9-A15F-E0FA737B0EB4@bluezbox.com> <CAJ-VmonE6twJ519k=Q1_R9RNYi4ZP19kjYh7yBB5mrUtG9iEgQ@mail.gmail.com>
index | next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail
On Dec 1, 2011, at 1:15 AM, Adrian Chadd wrote:
> .. hm. thinking about it, why not have a port variable flag that marks
> a port as "cross compiles" ?
>
> Then we could (in theory) do a cross-compile test run based on which
> ports in the ports tree have this variable set?
In the doodle I did years ago, I had a CROSS_BUILD_FLAVOR = {trivial, gnuconf, custom} and had that drive some of the infrastructure. This didn't make it into the final hack we used at symmetricom, however. Some of that can be inferred from other variables, but we didn't bother to try to build stuff we didn't need and that might not be working.
Warner
home |
help
Want to link to this message? Use this
URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?3B91BA0A-F5E8-4C57-8F09-0583B375C6D9>