I still don't like the idea of multiarch just cause its going to be not easy to make my slitaz-tank isos anymore. So i will not be able support other anyways since slitaz-tank was meant for x86 only so we only have to have 1 type of arch. Its why i used slitaz in first place. It was simple. With multiarch it can't be done so simply. I know this cause i did try looking at making a source dvd like slitaz-tank on archlinux back in 2010.
So arm and x86_64 will have not support in my slitaz-tank. X86_64 can be done by simply making a linux-pae since that will allow up to 64gb of ram installed of 4gb. Thats the main reason to move to x86_64 anyways and no computer being sold today has 64gb or more in them by default. I just thought you should know slitaz-tank will just have to be a subproject and nothing offical cause of no multiarch support. On Mon, May 14, 2012 at 7:52 PM, Christophe Lincoln <[email protected]>wrote: > > Hi, > > First, we have now 2 cross environment up and running on Tank with > both toolchain build and rebuildable with the new 'cross' tool. The ARM > port is now quiet well tested by me and x86_64 is getting better day > after day. But we still in a testing stage, path may changes, cross > will be improved and fixed, so no stress about packages but we must > think about it. > > http://cook.slitaz.org/cross/ > > In all case we have to change tazpkg/spk to install the correct > packages for the given arch. To know on witch platform SliTaz is > running I have introduced SLITAZ_ARCH in /etc/slitaz/slitaz.conf, the > package manager must used it. > > "Actually, the whole multi arch system is complicated, non-kiss and > looks awful." > > Usual complain without any patch attached :-/ This is how I worked thes > last weeks and how I work to have multiarch chroot and cookers: > > One chroot by arch --> dont mess-up files, safer > /home/slitaz/VERSION/ARCH/chroot with the usual tree. I have adapted > tazdev for multiarch (use last on from repo), to create an ARM chroot > and chroot: > > # tazdev gen-chroot --arch=arm > # tazdev -c --arch=arm > > Then clone cookutils repo and install-cross from inside or outside the > chroot, but use last cross. Edit config or at least check variables, > when ready with cross and it cross.conf file installed you can compile > the all toolchain at once (take more than an hour on tank): > > # cross compile > > Cross will compile a toolchain targeting the ARM paltform, these tools > will never run on ARM but on the build machine to produce code for > the target arch. It's why I dont use --build= in cross, so it build > binaries optimised for the build host (ie: i686 for tank). After hours > and hours of testing I came the the conclusion that use a single script > like cook is much more easier than make cross-arch-* packages, at least > for now since cross-compiling is NOT simple by itself. > > For more info please read 'cross' documentation in cookutils source or: > http://hg.slitaz.org/cookutils/raw-file/tip/doc/cross.txt > > I think it would be nice to use --with-sysroot= for cross-tools, ther > is an option in 'cross' but more work and testing is needed. > > If you have code providing an other WORKING solution, please share. If > you have patches for cross, please sent them or add them in a patch > directory in cookutils. > > > will have do like subfolders like any and then $ARCH folder. The idea > > is to use softlinks from any folder and put then in $ARCH. So > > packages folder will be more like this: > > packages/$ARCH > > packages/any > > Yes this look nice but I think we can do without any symlink. We need > the package manager use any/packages.list for all arch then use > SLITAZ_ARCH to set: packages/$ARCH > > > This way we don't need a cookutils-2.0.tazpkg and > > cookutils-2.0-arm.tazpkg since cookutils should work just fine as one > > package on both systems. This will also be helpful for perl, python, > > and docs packages. > > > > This is cause a idea for now. We will have to see if it can be done > > without breaking everything. > > Nice idea! Why not implement that in spk/tazpkg yourself ? > > > PS We need to add a way to rebuild packages database without wok. I > > have this in my-cookutils. This is just to make it simple to make > > package database. > > Ok, can you add an updated patch in cookutils/patch so I can test it > with the current cook, I'm not agains changes in cook but want to > review any patch and get them in one by one. This because cook is up > for one year now without critical bugs and it just work. > > - Christophe > > -- > SliTaz GNU/Linux Mailing list - http://www.slitaz.org/ > >
