Another useful option would be to build and maintain a VM image with the complete tool chain installed. It would be great to have as a reference and would let people who wanted to cross-compile do it much easier, at an obvious cost of VM overhead. Pity Windows and OSX compilers couldn't be VM-ized the same way.
On 9/5/2014 7:25 AM, Lance Corrimal wrote: > Hmm.. maybe change that build environment to something that is actually > compatibel to something that users might have? as in, not using compiler > versions / library versions that aren't available from official > repositories for the distribution in question (prebuilt libs excluded)? > > Alternative: package the compiler toolchain as a prebuilt archive, d/l > and unpack into the source tree on build. preferrably as statically > linked stuff. > > > cheers > LC > > > Am 04.09.2014 um 20:14 schrieb Monty Brandenberg: >> On 9/4/2014 11:00 AM, Lance Corrimal wrote: >>> Hi, >>> >>> >>> I guess noone else builds on linux AND tries to actually have a build >>> environment that is exactly the same as the one Ll uses... Since it is NOT >>> DOCUMENTED. >> Nobody would *want* the exact same build environment that we use. >> But Oz is, I believe, running down the info on the tool chain >> components. We're large enough that that info is stuck in a silo >> somewhere and we have to blast it out. >> >> m >> > _______________________________________________ > Policies and (un)subscribe information available here: > http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev > Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges _______________________________________________ Policies and (un)subscribe information available here: http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges
