El 2022-06-06 11:43, DustDFG escribió:
On Mon, Jun 6, 2022 at 3:04 PM DustDFG <[email protected]> wrote:
[..]
It seems to me that gcc has linker option -rpath...
Ok. I didn't think -rpath won't have sense.
That linker option is for ld(1).
First of all, I want to say that I understand why we need tmp system
but I can't understand where it depends on something that we can't
pack like darkcrusade.
After processing stage 1 we get tmp system that depends on itself
only. Yes, we need host system to run it (with chroot) but we can move
it to another system. It is self-contained like darkcrusade compilers.
Where am I wrong?
It is not as per se as darkcrusade, because the purpose differs, but if
it is true that it tries to be self-contained; this could change, if
Binutils (for example) introduces something that needs to be dynamic
instead of static, by which I mean that up to here or so far the
temporal system is built as static. In this sense, I see darkcrusade as
more independent.
While the temporary system could be packaged and distributed in order to
save time in building it (stage 1), it implies more work for us, at the
same time it can kill the possibility that other people build it under
other hardware, system and different versions in order to get bug
reports...
