Some Questions

Some Questions

[Justin Chen]

Hello all,

I have two questions, some input would be awesome. :)

1. Are there any plans to support LSB based builds?

2. I am building multiple cross-compilers and throwing them into the
same toolchain. I am doing this by running separate builds into the
same out dir. This works nicely, however, host components need to be
rebuilt for each configuration(which waste some time). Would you guys
be interested in a feature where you can pass multiple config files
and have crosstools-ng build all of them in one go? (I can put a patch
together, if you guys would be willing to accept such a feature)

Thanks,
Justin

Re: Some Questions

[Alexey Neyman]

On 03/20/2017 03:02 PM, Justin Chen wrote:
> Hello all,
>
> I have two questions, some input would be awesome. :)
>
> 1. Are there any plans to support LSB based builds?
I am not sure what you want from crosstool-NG in this respect. If you 
are talking about the layout of the resulting filesystem, crosstool-NG 
is but a little piece - the construction of the filesystem is typically 
handled by other tools such as buildroot. Perhaps, you need to explain 
this a bit more.
> 2. I am building multiple cross-compilers and throwing them into the
> same toolchain. I am doing this by running separate builds into the
> same out dir. This works nicely, however, host components need to be
> rebuilt for each configuration(which waste some time). Would you guys
> be interested in a feature where you can pass multiple config files
> and have crosstools-ng build all of them in one go? (I can put a patch
> together, if you guys would be willing to accept such a feature)
It would be interesting but I am not sure how much we can safely share. 
Some host components are still configured for a particular target.
Others may be shared, but this would place certain requirements on the 
host/build configuration parts (which obviously must be the same for all 
of them).
BTW, by "out dir" do you mean the build directory or the installation 
directory?

I am not totally opposed to this, but before you start hacking around, 
I'd suggest you make a small write-up on *what* you intend to share and 
*how* you are going to check that it is actually shareable (e.g., fail? 
create a separate build directory for each different config? anything else?)

Regards,
Alexey.

Re: Some Questions

[Justin Chen]

On Mon, Mar 20, 2017 at 10:37 PM, Alexey Neyman <stilor@att.net> wrote:
> On 03/20/2017 03:02 PM, Justin Chen wrote:
>>
>> Hello all,
>>
>> I have two questions, some input would be awesome. :)
>>
>> 1. Are there any plans to support LSB based builds?
>
> I am not sure what you want from crosstool-NG in this respect. If you are
> talking about the layout of the resulting filesystem, crosstool-NG is but a
> little piece - the construction of the filesystem is typically handled by
> other tools such as buildroot. Perhaps, you need to explain this a bit more.
Ah sorry! I can explain more. I was wondering if there were plans to
support building toolchains with the LSB-sdk.
http://linuxtesting.org/lsb_sdk
Basically, the sdk will help compile the toolchain to follow the LSB
standard. This means the resulting toolchain will be more portable
between different linux systems.
https://wiki.linuxfoundation.org/lsb/start
We will need to download the sdk, setup the environment, then change a
few configure options here and there.
>>
>> 2. I am building multiple cross-compilers and throwing them into the
>> same toolchain. I am doing this by running separate builds into the
>> same out dir. This works nicely, however, host components need to be
>> rebuilt for each configuration(which waste some time). Would you guys
>> be interested in a feature where you can pass multiple config files
>> and have crosstools-ng build all of them in one go? (I can put a patch
>> together, if you guys would be willing to accept such a feature)
>
> It would be interesting but I am not sure how much we can safely share. Some
> host components are still configured for a particular target.
> Others may be shared, but this would place certain requirements on the
> host/build configuration parts (which obviously must be the same for all of
> them).
> BTW, by "out dir" do you mean the build directory or the installation
> directory?
The installation directory.
>
> I am not totally opposed to this, but before you start hacking around, I'd
> suggest you make a small write-up on *what* you intend to share and *how*
> you are going to check that it is actually shareable (e.g., fail? create a
> separate build directory for each different config? anything else?)
Sounds good to me. I still need to work out the details myself, but if
it sounds reasonable... Sure! I can do a small write-up first.

Thanks,
Justin
>
> Regards,
> Alexey.