Date: Thu, 1 Dec 2011 00:00:13 -0800 From: Oleksandr Tymoshenko <gonzo@bluezbox.com> To: Stefan Bethke <stb@lassitu.de> Cc: freebsd-embedded@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Ports cross-compilation Message-ID: <447CC818-CEA3-46B9-A15F-E0FA737B0EB4@bluezbox.com> In-Reply-To: <96407605-79A9-4AE3-AC2F-13BD97943153@lassitu.de> References: <4ED6FD47.6050704@bluezbox.com> <96407605-79A9-4AE3-AC2F-13BD97943153@lassitu.de>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
>=20 >> - Package builder works only on installed port. >=20 > Have you looked at pkgng yet? The wiki page says it can create a = package from a separate directory tree. No, not yet. By "Package builder" I meant package-building=20 targets of ports Makefiles. pkg_create can work on directory=20 tree + setof pre-generated files. It's just that at the moment=20 we use "pkg_create -b" to create package archive. >> - Makefile for cross-compilable port should be split into three = parts: >> common, native, cross. It's not clear who should maintain cross part >> though. >=20 > =46rom many previous discussions, people are reluctant to add files to = all ports because of the filesystem and VCS bloat that causes. Also, = considering the number of ports there are in the tree, and how well = maintained many of the lesser ones are, any solution that requires no or = very little changes to each port would stand a much bigger chance of = being implemented successfully. As I told - getting all ports cross-compilable is impossible.=20 We're talking about most-used in embedded environment ports. I'd say=20 it's a couple of hundreds. So we need modify only these ports and only=20= if it's really required. Simple ports like converters/base64 will not=20 require modification at all.=20=
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?447CC818-CEA3-46B9-A15F-E0FA737B0EB4>