On Monday 30 July 2012, Gregory Peele ARA/CFD wrote: > From: Alexander Neundorf [mailto:a.neundorf-w...@gmx.net] > Sent: Saturday, July 28, 2012 11:48 AM > To: cmake@cmake.org > Cc: Gregory Peele ARA/CFD > Subject: Re: [CMake] Recommended Multilib Build Approach? > > On Thursday 21 June 2012, Gregory Peele ARA/CFD wrote: > >> Hi all, > >> > >> I want to be able to build 32-bit and 64-bit from the same GCC multilib > >> install (currently for MinGW-w64, though this also applies for Linux/Mac > >> GCC and LLVM). To clarify, I want to be able to do two completely > >> separate builds in separate binary dirs - building fat binaries from > >> multiple architectures in the same binary dir is a separate problem I'm > >> also interested in for Android, but I'm not worrying about that yet. > >> > >> What is the "proper" approach to building the non-default arch in a > >> multilib setup? Obviously using CMake as-is will build the default arch > >> just fine. > > > > I think there are no recommendations yet. I'm not aware that somebody > > else already tried to do this. Can the executables built for the > > non-default architecture be executed on the hopst where you are building > > ? If so, there should be a way :-) > > If not, this sounds like somewhat like crosscompiling. > > Alex > > I haven't explored the topic any further since posting. On a multilib > system, all multilib architectures are "native" to the host and can be > executed.
Ah, ok. So the idea is not that I have e.g. /usr/lib/i386/ and /usr/lib/x86-64 and also /usr/lib/armv7/ and /usr/lib/mips/, which have different libs but share the headers and all other architecture independent files ? Alex
-- Powered by www.kitware.com Visit other Kitware open-source projects at http://www.kitware.com/opensource/opensource.html Please keep messages on-topic and check the CMake FAQ at: http://www.cmake.org/Wiki/CMake_FAQ Follow this link to subscribe/unsubscribe: http://www.cmake.org/mailman/listinfo/cmake
