Re: [Crash-utility] [PATCH 0/5] let make flexible for multiple host

(2012/04/17 23:44), Dave Anderson wrote: > > > ----- Original Message ----- >> Hi Dave, >> >> This patch set will make configure or build flexible for host environment, >> in particular dealing with cross compiler. >> Please consider about this proposal. >> >> patch#1: >> By declaring tables about target and host relationships, >> cleanup corresponding code and the new build combination will be >> adapted briefly. >> >> Remaining patches: >> Try to relieve cross compiler burden by using explicit >> host_cross option. >> I'm using cross compiler environ host=x86 for target=ppc, >> and might attempt target=<another arch> in the near future. >> I stocked private patches to accomplish cross compiling >> but I'd like to discard them permanently with your agreement. >> >> Thanks, >> Toshi > > I am presuming that you have successfully built a PPC binary on an > x86 or x86_64 host, and then you have copied the binary to a PPC host > that doesn't have a resident compiler? But then again, looking at > your Hi Dave, I didn't explain about background issues. I built a PPC binary on an x86 host cross compiler. When run it, I have to ftp to PPC machine where dose not have self build tools. Here is dumping my build environment info. $ uname -m x86_64 $ file gcc gcc: ELF 32-bit LSB executable, Intel 80386, version 1 (SYSV), dynamically linked (uses shared libs), for GNU/Linux 2.2.5, stripped $ ./gcc -dumpmachine powerpc-linux-gnu > patch as is, it looks like you can only allow "target=PPC" on a > PPC64 host, > which is already supported?: > > static struct host_table { > > ... [ cut ] ... > > }, ppc[] = { > { > .host = PPC64, > .cflags = "-m32 -D_FILE_OFFSET_BITS=64 -fPIC", > .gdb_conf_flags = "--target=ppc-elf-linux > CFLAGS=-m32", > } > }; This "target=PPC" on a PPC64 host has been already supported since I copied it into ppc[] table. [Crash-utility] [PATCH v1 1/4] Support PPC32 Core analysis on PPC64 Host https://www.redhat.com/archives/crash-utility/2011-November/msg00019.html The purpose is to build ppc 32bit binary with compatible target CFLAGS "-m32" of ppc64 compiler. This is similar idea with x86_64. But I added new cross support(is_cross is TRUE) in patch#5 which is distinct from original purpose. + { + .host = X86, + .cflags = "-D_FILE_OFFSET_BITS=64", + .gdb_conf_flags = "--host=i686-pc-linux-gnu " + "--target=powerpc-elf-linux", + .is_cross = TRUE, + }, > In any case, I would prefer that you specifically address your > particular PPC-on-X86 build issue, because I'm not sure what > other combinations would be particularly useful. > I'm not particularly interested in speculative changes. The only > future architecture support I can see on the horizon is 64-bit ARM, > and that is a few a few years away. And we are lucky that x86 and > ARM have the same endianness and data-type sizes, so we can continue > (hopefully) to build x86_64 binaries to analyze 64-bit ARM vmcores > on x86_64 hosts. My issues are to arrange original crash package as compilable one with cross. I edit package's Makefile or configure parameters --host/--target at spec file, finally building with environment variables CC, AR, LD, etc. By applying patches, I can build crash only with tiny spec update, "make target=PPC host_cross=X86" without modification of released archive. Then, I'll start mips architecture (seems to go toward embedded minority). There are probably the similar considerations about cross compile. I want to be done with "make target=MIPS host_cross=X86" by adding mips tables.

> Also, note that your patch fails because it collides with Rabin's queued > fix for building SIAL for target=ARM and target=PPC builds: > > [Crash-utility] [PATCH] build sial with TARGET_CFLAGS > https://www.redhat.com/archives/crash-utility/2012-March/msg00113.html I haven't caught this update. I'd send updated portion. Thanks, Toshi