Johannes Schauer dixit: >with /usr/lib/x86_64-linux-musl/musl-gcc.specs as a spec file. Both of these >things make the interface provided by the package musl-tools architecture >dependent. This means that a package that musl-tools:amd64 will give you >different functionality compared to musl-tools:i386.
I had thought it would compile to the target architecture then. But perhaps it is too dangerous. Back to the original place where I saw this: so how do we make mksh cross-buildable/-bootstrappable? Ideally, the full set of dependencies as necessary would be there. For bootstrapping, we can remove the extra libcs, it will work with just glibc, although the package content will differ. Is there a standard build profile for that already, and which releases support that? debian/rules and everything it calls already handle absence of dietlibc, klibc, musl fine. Question is also, should we even invest into making those libcs usable in a cross context? bye, //mirabilos -- 16:47⎜«mika:#grml» .oO(mira ist einfach gut....) 23:22⎜«mikap:#grml» mirabilos: und dein bootloader ist geil :) 23:29⎜«mikap:#grml» und ich finds saugeil dass ich ein bsd zum booten mit grml hab, das muss ich dann gleich mal auf usb-stick installieren -- Michael Prokop über MirOS bsd4grml
