On Sat, Apr 19, 2014 at 04:43:20AM +0200, Matthias Klose wrote: > this is not biarch, but a cross compiler. So what you need to do is to make > sure > that you are able to build a canadian cross (cross-building the cross > compiler). > Just omitting to build the hppa64 cross-compiler would leave you without a > compiler to build the kernel.
I do not fully grasp this yet and suspect and x-y-problem on my side. So let me step back a little and explain where I am coming from to see where we should be going: When building a stage1 cross compiler for hppa (DEB_TARGET_ARCH=hppa DEB_CROSS_NO_BIARCH=yes DEB_STAGE=stage1), I got a configure error that no hppa64-linux-gnu-ld could be found. I (wrongly) concluded that this would be a multilib issue and indeed setting gcc's internal with_hppa64 variable to disabled would make the stage1 (uselessly?) succeed. The binutils I used were built with WITH_SYSROOT=/ TARGET=hppa. So there are basically two options to solve this bug: * binutils learns to produce hppa64-linux-gnu-ld * gcc learns not to use hppa64-linux-gnu-ld In the light of your answer the latter seems unlikely. Is it correct that the binutils cross build should produce a hppa64 ld? Looking again at the binutils debian source, I can see that see a number of branches on hppa that add hppa64 functionality, but they branch on DEB_HOST_ARCH. It seems that the current binutils package only supports reverse cross builds for hppa64 and no forward cross builds. Is this correct? Helmut -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
