From: David Demelier <markand@malikania.fr>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 15.0 \(3693.40.0.1.81\))
Subject: Re: Availability of cross toolchains in aports
Date: Wed, 16 Feb 2022 20:09:47 +0100
References: <CHXEETFPZAAO.2XE8CAMV5TF0P@taiga>
To: ~alpine/devel@lists.alpinelinux.org
In-Reply-To: <CHXEETFPZAAO.2XE8CAMV5TF0P@taiga>
Message-Id: <EA3A1DD8-84B5-4CD0-BC52-D57384492B97@malikania.fr>


> On 16 Feb 2022, at 11:27, Drew DeVault <sir@cmpwn.com> wrote:
>=20
> I think that we should have a greater variety of cross compiler
> toolchains available in aports, providing in reach repo at least =
enough
> cross-compilers to build Alpine for any target supported by a stable
> Alpine release.
>=20
> Thoughts?

clang is by itself a cross-compiler. basically one can setup an =
environment by grabbing a minirootfs and extract alpine packages itself =
and then using appropriate command line options you=E2=80=99re pretty =
much done:

clang --sysroot=3D/alpine-aarch64 -target alpine-aarch64-linux-musl =
-fuse-ld=3Dlld test.c -o test

boum, test is aarch64 executable.

Nothing more, nothing less.

That said cross-compiling is still pretty much utopia. Some packages =
build executables that they run during the build process, having to =
specify a host compiler and a target compiler which many build system =
don=E2=80=99t support. Not mentioning that many software just don=E2=80=99=
t care.

I don=E2=80=99t think spending effort on this is any useful.

=E2=80=94=20
David=