On Fri, 2025-01-17 at 03:44 +0000, hongxu via lists.openembedded.org wrote:
> The background is we used extended buildtools SDK to provide gcc and other
> build tools on host for a Yocto build, but recipes that uses gcc-multilib
> and glibc-multilib on host will fail with extended buildtools. For example,
> lib32-luajit fails with extended buildtools.
>
>
> With a simple search, we have enabled multilib for target gcc [1][2]
>
>
> $ cat << ENDOF > main.c
> #include <stdio.h>
> int main() {
> printf("Hello world");
> return 0;
> }
> ENDOF
>
>
> $ gcc main.c -o main-64
> $ gcc -m32 main.c -o main-32
So to rephrase this, the issue is that buildtools-extended-tarball
doesn't contain 32 bit libgcc/glibc on 64 bit platforms and therefore
can't build 32 bit binaries.
I guess the question is then, how often are people running into
situations where they need to do this?
> I am not sure it is worth to improve multilib bbclass to support nativesdk
> extension, great efforts are needed and will make multilib bbclass more
> complicated
It would add a lot of complexity and the changes I'm proposing to the
toolchain to make clang recipe selectable will probably conflict with
it too. I'm not yet seeing a compelling case to add that complexity. We
definitely could do it but I'm not convinced we should.
Cheers,
Richard
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Links: You receive all messages sent to this group.
View/Reply Online (#2092):
https://lists.openembedded.org/g/openembedded-architecture/message/2092
Mute This Topic: https://lists.openembedded.org/mt/110660766/21656
Group Owner: [email protected]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.openembedded.org/g/openembedded-architecture/unsub
[[email protected]]
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
