Date: Tue, 1 Sep 2009 14:39:26 +0000 From: "b. f." <bf1783@googlemail.com> To: freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.org Subject: Fwd: 32 bit ports on an AMD64 system Message-ID: <d873d5be0909010739h1932dbe1g4e93e45d59564035@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <d873d5be0909010736i4bfa6cb6nab36123b2a066b17@mail.gmail.com> References: <d873d5be0908310811q7974f467xf772f95c662c5e19@mail.gmail.com> <80f4f2b20909010644j7962dc4cub71e725d083072ef@mail.gmail.com> <d873d5be0909010736i4bfa6cb6nab36123b2a066b17@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
>So, make/build/run a normal jail using the 64 bit os "world", add -m32 >to the make.conf CFLAGS and CXXFLAGS, build stuff in the jail, and >copy it to main (non-jailed) system, and run ldconfig on the library >directories? I'd probably also change PREFIX/LOCALBASE to prevent the >files from the ports from colling with the base system files when I >copy them over. Well, this would certainly help with building the ports safely. But I think we -- at least I was -- were thinking that you would actually leave them in the jail, and run them from the jailed environment, so there would be fewer run-time problems, and no work to transfer them over. Remember that you've got to ensure that there is no problem with run-time linking of shared libraries, some of which (in your current scheme) will have both 32-bit and 64-bit versions with the same soname. You can probably work around this problem as well, but it seems easier to leave them in the jail. b.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?d873d5be0909010739h1932dbe1g4e93e45d59564035>