DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws;
        d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
        h=subject:from:to:cc:in-reply-to:references:content-type:date
         :message-id:mime-version:x-mailer:content-transfer-encoding;
        b=UOpxThEs1LcdyEwd8rs/RYmTN7gsLN6UCovGpVqn9sAu6+oI/BzHM4N5WfifeT2vb/
         FJULFY2yBsRecBt9KsQ8VJzEaZFCUG6BO8RmaZl2JwoX1VgigF2QJU8RWsuxsE9KkTWT
         03LnDiXc2giXJPRrzMMD2ZI2E30xXGQNNSGnk=
Subject: Re: [alpine-devel] Attempting x86_64 build
From: Natanael Copa <natanael.copa@gmail.com>
To: Mark Constable <markc@renta.net>
Cc: alpine-devel@lists.alpinelinux.org
In-Reply-To: <4A73EA4D.7030204@renta.net>
References: <4A73EA4D.7030204@renta.net>
Content-Type: text/plain
Date: Sat, 01 Aug 2009 11:44:08 +0200
Message-Id: <1249119848.19561.1282.camel@localhost.localdomain>
Precedence: list
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

On Sat, 2009-08-01 at 17:10 +1000, Mark Constable wrote:
> I've got an x86_64 busybox/uclibc partition set up, courtesy of buildroot,
> and I've started building a few packages. 

Cool!

> nano built okay so I've moved
> on to apk-tools so I can obviously start to use Alpine tools to build
> and install more packages. It needs pkgconfig, zlib and openssl so I
> managed to build pkgconfig and zlib but I'm stuck on openssl because it
> needs perl and the buildroot target only has miniperl (or maybe none at
> all, not sure) so a coule of questions...
> 
> . would it be possible to build openssl without using perl?

I doubt. And you will need perl for lot other stuff too. Everything that
involves autoconf/automake and things like kernel. Bootstrapping does
require perl at an early stage.

> . would it be possible to build apk-tools without openssl?

I think the way to do bootstrapping is use a static version of
apk-tools. You could probably use a 32 bit static, or if you want, a 64
bit static built on a glibc host. It will be ugly big but it will get
you started.

> . should I drop back to pre v1.9 and use the scripted apk tools?

No. We want fix bootstrapping for apk-tools.

Does buildroot provide gcc, binutils and gnu make?

Otherwise, it might be that gentoo have a stage1 or stage3 with x86_64
uclibc. They have some binary packages:
http://tinderbox.x86.dev.gentoo.org/uclibc/amd64/All/

Not sure but this looks like gcc with uclibc:
http://tinderbox.x86.dev.gentoo.org/cross-amd64/x86_64-gentoo-linux-uclibc/

You could probably tar -jxf make, binutils, gcc, uclibc, linux-headers,
file, openssl, pax-utils, busybox to get started. Might help to have a
static busybox and apk-tools to get started.

> I barely know how to use the 1.9 apk toolset let alone the earlier ones.
> 
> ***
> 
> I've also got an Archlinux ARM chroot and managed to also build nano
> but nothing else so far as their is some problem with setting time
> in the provided glibc. If I manage to get enough x86_64 Alpine packages
> to build, to bootstrap a clean system, I'll post a tarball and follow
> the same method for ARM.

I think gentoo had some ARM stages you could start from.

Thanks for working on this!

-nc



---
Unsubscribe:  alpine-devel+unsubscribe@lists.alpinelinux.org
Help:         alpine-devel+help@lists.alpinelinux.org
---