sukucorp at gmail.com
Thu Dec 15 08:49:19 PST 2005
On 12/14/05, Ken Moffat <ken at linuxfromscratch.org> wrote:
> On Wed, 14 Dec 2005, Tushar Teredesai wrote:
> > Sorry, that was a typo. I meant I am performing a native build. I will
> > be using a 64bit host.
> Ouch, i686 LFS not good enough for your host ? ;)
Why use a 32bit host when there is a 64bit LFS livecd:)
> > Perhaps it would be easier to have a pure-64 bit build and for 32 bit
> > libraries and packages use a seperate prefix such as /opt/32bit or
> > something?
> It certainly sounds attractive. I was thinking about that a while ago,
> but you need to build a cross-compiler to build x86 from pure64 x86_64,
> so you will go some way down repeating the cross-tools and tools path,
> and then install a 32-bit X. Trouble is, there are so many different
> ways to cut this cake.
I thought the 64bit toolchain can build both 64bit and 32bit code. So
I should be able to build 64bit code into /usr and 32bit into
> Of course, pure64 x86_64-64 cannot run 'make bootstrap' without some
> further hacking (it will try to use lib64 for some of its temporary
> tools), so arguably its only benefit is that it saves us passing
> --libdir=/usr/lib64 to all applications.
To make my life simple, I am planning to link the lib dirs to lib64.
Of course at this step all my knowledge is theoretical. Will have to
wait till next week to really start my practical. There was a teeny
weeny fire in the apartment above us. So the electricity is off for a
couple of days. Staying in an alternate apartment with no
mailto:tushar at linuxfromscratch.org
More information about the cross-lfs