Talk:Cross-compiling tools package guidelines

Package Naming

Should the packages contain the entire target in their name? The current naming suggest is not used in the example PKGBUILD. Allan 22:57, 15 October 2009 (EDT)

Out of path executables

Where would these go? binutils buts its biniaries (without the target in their name) in /usr/lib/cross-i686-pc-mingw32/i686-pc-mingw32/bin. It is a bit unwieldy but seems OK... Maybe just use /usr/lib/cross-i686-pc-mingw32/bin (i.e. ${_target}/bin)? Allan 22:59, 15 October 2009 (EDT)

The default location seems to unrememberable. The /usr/lib/cross-${_target}/bin/ is definetely better, but still... What about /usr/bin/cross/${_target} (I know it is a minor difference to /usr/lib but somehow I would expect user executables inside /usr/bin)?

I was not able to reproduce it now, but I think that with some ./configure settings, not all executables have their not-prefixed-counterparts in /usr/lib/cross-i686-pc-mingw32/i686-pc-mingw32/bin so we would need to do some symlinks anyway. --Hotspur 06:31, 16 October 2009 (EDT)

CLFS is Now Out-of-date

clfs.org has been dormant since 2019-04-19 (although there is a little mailing list activity since the final quarter of 2019). Maybe we could link directly to the latest book read page instead? Or the github page?

Perhaps crosstool-ng (github) and buildroot (git source), which are both alive, should be highlighted now? Should these have a separate section with short descriptions and links? These are just suggestions. I don't have experience cross-compiling, at least not for a couple of decades now. I am interested in porting Arch to RISC-V but have the usual time limitations. -- Cmsigler (talk) 15:22, 4 November 2020 (UTC)