Hi, On Wed, 7 Dec 2005 11:30:03 +0100 "Antoine Leca" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >BTW, this is not really cross-compiling. Real cross-compiling IMHO usually >involves having a cross-compiling target environment, different from the >host environment (usually selected as "higher priority" flags overriding the >normal ones).
Yeah, as you pointed out, the standard cross-compiling by GNU tools use completely separated directories: aslike "/usr/i386-pc-linux-gnu" and "/usr/amd64-pc-linux-gnu", to avoid mixing files for target platform with files for host platform. GNU/Linux for x86-64 stores i386 libraries into /lib and x86-64 native libraries into /lib64. Without doubt, it's for runtime binary compatibilities with existing GNU/Linux for i386, but I don't know if it's for developer environment compatibility. I'm afraid that there are many softwares that we cannot share header files between i386 and x86-64 architechtures. >perhaps select the correct ones according to flags such >as -m32 and -m64 for gcc..., that is, _not_ really doing something as >complex as setting up a complete cross-compiling environment. I agree. It's a bit confusing to call such compiling as "cross-compiling" >> It would be very much desired that: >> 1. freetype-config would be recoded to detect its environment > >Can you please elaborate on what do you mean by "your environment" here? > >I am sorry if it seems ingenious. I am not currently running Linux, nor >GLib; as such I am not sure what is the current "official" process of >configuration of Freetype; if I am not a "normal" user of Freetype and as >such my remarks are irrelevant, please say so, I won't be sad. I'm afraid there's no official process in this issue - there might be just "how popular GNU/Linux distributors (wanna) do". Regards, mpsuzuki _______________________________________________ Freetype-devel mailing list Freetype-devel@nongnu.org http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/freetype-devel