From owner-freebsd-i386@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Jan 16 01:15:03 2009 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-i386@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F157A106564A; Fri, 16 Jan 2009 01:15:03 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from andrew.hotlab@hotmail.com) Received: from col0-omc3-s18.col0.hotmail.com (col0-omc3-s18.col0.hotmail.com [65.55.34.157]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CD20E8FC13; Fri, 16 Jan 2009 01:15:03 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from andrew.hotlab@hotmail.com) Received: from COL112-W37 ([65.55.34.136]) by col0-omc3-s18.col0.hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Thu, 15 Jan 2009 17:15:03 -0800 Message-ID: X-Originating-IP: [217.133.1.92] From: Andrew Hotlab To: Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2009 01:15:03 +0000 Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: <20090115230949.GD16116@server.vk2pj.dyndns.org> References: <20090114211616.GC16116@server.vk2pj.dyndns.org> <20090115230949.GD16116@server.vk2pj.dyndns.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-OriginalArrivalTime: 16 Jan 2009 01:15:03.0391 (UTC) FILETIME=[DC146EF0:01C97777] Cc: freebsd-i386@freebsd.org, freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org, freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Subject: RE: Cross compiling FreeBSD X-BeenThere: freebsd-i386@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: I386-specific issues for FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2009 01:15:04 -0000 > Date: Fri=2C 16 Jan 2009 10:09:49 +1100 > From: peterjeremy@optushome.com.au > > On 2009-Jan-15 01:12:03 +0000=2C Andrew Hotlab wrote: >>Ok=2C so I think that in a production environment I should deploy one bui= lder machine >>for each target architecture I have to support on my network... I'm right= ? > > A single build machine can cross-build for multiple environments so you > really only need one machine. > Yes it's true=2C but the limitation about UFS flags over NFS will force me = to make some manual operations and=2C even if I'll successfully script them=2C it will t= urn to increase the "total cost" of that solution... so I'd prefer to have a build machine for = each supported Tier1 architecture=2C if this can let me "sleep better at night". I don't c= onsider this a big issue: after all=2C I feel the need of a builder machine because I have a l= ot of physical machines to update... I can surely dedicate a couple of them (maybe a singl= e amd64 in a dual-boot scenario with both i386 and amd64 FreeBSD versions)! :) >>One last question: I would expect the same issues if I wish to to support= many >>FreeBSD releases running of one single type of architecture? (i.e.: both = builder >>and targets are amd64 machines=2C but I run RELENG_7 on the builder and >>RELENG_6_4 and RELENG_7_1 on the targets) > > In general=2C backward compatibility is supported=2C so a world built on = a > RELENG_7 box should be able to be installed by a RELENG_7_1 target > (though not by a RELENG_6_4 target). And you can run into he same > problem with different i386 variants - if your build machine is built > with (eg) P4 options than a generic world built by that box cannot be > installed by (eg) a P2 due to instruction differences. > So I have to experiment a little to better understand what can be safely do= ne and what it would be "at risk". Maybe if worst comes to worst I'll have to = maintain a builder for each single architecture and major FreeBSD branch. It could b= e not impossible if I'll decide to support legacy releases only on older i386= hardware. Thank you so much for your help! Andrew _________________________________________________________________ Invite your mail contacts to join your friends list with Windows Live Space= s. It's easy! http://spaces.live.com/spacesapi.aspx?wx_action=3Dcreate&wx_url=3D/friends.= aspx&mkt=3Den-us=