>On Mon, 12 Dec 2016 02:28:46 +0000 >MyungJoo Ham <[email protected]> wrote: > >> >On Mon, 12 Dec 2016 01:43:37 +0000 >> >MyungJoo Ham <[email protected]> wrote: >> > >> [] >> >> >> >> In order to build dotnet-core runtime (coreclr) armv7l/Linux with >> >> crosscompilers, the building environment should be x86-64. x86-32 >> >> simply cannot support it because dotnet-core runtime does not >> >> support x86-32; you need to run dotnet-core itself to build >> >> dotnet-core (to build mscorlib.dll for target arch) >> > >> >this is what i don't get. MONO (which is what xamarin was actually >> >build on top of) runs on armv7. even armv6. it also has run on i586 >> >for years and years. dotnetcore if it requires a jit to run (a CLR >> >jit) ..then there already is one - MONO has had it for years. >> >> >> That was about cross-compiling. Even for MONO, crosscompiling MONO >> is far-more faster than qemu-native-copmiling MONO. In Tizen OBS/GBS >> environment, packages using GCC (including MONO) gets automatically >> crosscompiling supports from qemu scripts. Our Tizen OBS/GBS simply >> didn't enable that for LLVM, yet. > >not talking speed here. just "can it". of course running a qemu arm >emulator on x86 to emulate arm binaries is silly (and we've been doing >this for a long time for binaries that should have become native to the >build host). > >what worries me is more "if you now built on an arm host or a mips host >etc." what would happen? all the distro build systems and setups i have >ever worked with would not have issues here. they will work. what i am >wondering is if this is going to simply make parts of tizen "only able >to be built on x86-64 as a cross-compile and in no other way" and THAT >would be a big problem. > >i understand that some things need awfully huge amounts of ram to >build. let's not combine that with an architecture issue.
I didn't say you cannot build dotnet-core arm at arm. I was saying why they didn't want to build dotnet-core arm at arm. (and x86-32 cannot build it) The real problem what JY met is that OBS/GBS runs x86-32 for armv7l and x86-32 (not armv7l) does not support dotnet-core. And if they give up using qemu-accel (or equivalent) for dotnet-core (in fact, LLVM/Clang for qemu-accel), there is no issue. They can simply build the whole dotnet-core with GBS/OBS, which is already done and had been doing so for a while. In short, you can build dotnet-core arm at arm, with or without GBS/OBS. That's what Tizen dotnet-core folks had been doing for a while ago. (I'd been building it in TM1 as well) What I suppose JY and collegues trying to do is to avoid building it in ARM & x86-32 environment, not because of the RAM size, but because of build efficiency with qemu-accel+cross-compiling. Cheers, MyungJoo
_______________________________________________ Dev mailing list [email protected] https://lists.tizen.org/listinfo/dev
