On Thu, Jun 07, 2007 at 10:39:54AM -0600, Brendan Conoboy wrote:
>I would fully agree with the sentiment that cross-compiling the
entire
>distro as _the_ standard way of maintaining the arch package repository
>is not a realistic scenario and will likely never be. Preferably, I
>would like to just keep doing this entirely natively.
I hesitate to say never, prefering to invoke the forseeable future.
Wherever native builds are a viable option, it makes sense to use them.
Wherever cross builds are a viable option, it makes sense to use them.
What I said was that I don't think that cross-building packages will
ever supersede natively building packages as the preferred package
building method. I don't really see this changing any time soon --
even if I'd like to be able to build more packages cross.
>It appears a lot less effort to maintain a set of patches to make
some
>limited subset of packages (say, 300 packages) cross-compilable,
>though. In some cases, we'll have to do this anyway.
Indeed- if you can simply cross build the packages at the top of the
dependency tree (kernel, libc, coreutils, init, bash/sh), you are in
much better shape.
ACK.
What's more, they are typically very cross friendly.
My experience is somewhat different, but OK. :-)
One thing I wondered about, are your (cross-) diffs available
somewhere?