You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
My primary use case for a c/c++ build system would be in a cross compiling environment as well. I'm playing around with places to add hooks to build.
One that pops to mind is allowing the user to override the config folder directory, or perhaps instead the initial specific config file that gets included. kamathba/build@7147959
I would prefer that CROSS_COMPILE is considered automatically, or that there is a built in profile to account for it. I would not like to create config for each target I need to build, but pick the configuration from environment variable compatible with autotools. CROSS_COMPILE is used widely for this purpose, and most distro build systems set it appropriately.
Would something like a7e9b46 be the right direction?
What I'm not too sure about is: how to deal with the -I path. I'm surprised that at least on Fedora 26, the cross-compilers don't seem to set the right paths for include and libraries. Any suggestion?
Looks like right direction. Normally cross compilers are configured for sysroot, and often CFLAGS or similar will contain --sysroot=$target_root or similar. The affect of this is that all -I paths are searched under the given sysroot.
Activity
kamathba commentedon Jun 18, 2017
My primary use case for a c/c++ build system would be in a cross compiling environment as well. I'm playing around with places to add hooks to
build.One that pops to mind is allowing the user to override the config folder directory, or perhaps instead the initial specific config file that gets included. kamathba/build@7147959
c3d commentedon Jun 19, 2017
Actually, one of the first projects to use
buildwas using it mostly for cross-compilation.Typically, you would simply create a
config.gcc-cross-arm.mkand set yourBUILDENVto match. It may be as simple as:Please re-open the issue if you feel this is not good enough.
fabled commentedon Jun 19, 2017
I would prefer that CROSS_COMPILE is considered automatically, or that there is a built in profile to account for it. I would not like to create config for each target I need to build, but pick the configuration from environment variable compatible with autotools. CROSS_COMPILE is used widely for this purpose, and most distro build systems set it appropriately.
c3d commentedon Jun 19, 2017
Makes sense.
c3d commentedon Jun 19, 2017
Would something like a7e9b46 be the right direction?
What I'm not too sure about is: how to deal with the -I path. I'm surprised that at least on Fedora 26, the cross-compilers don't seem to set the right paths for include and libraries. Any suggestion?
fabled commentedon Jun 19, 2017
Looks like right direction. Normally cross compilers are configured for sysroot, and often CFLAGS or similar will contain --sysroot=$target_root or similar. The affect of this is that all -I paths are searched under the given sysroot.