Date: Tue, 3 May 2016 23:53:44 -0400 From: Rich Felker <dalias@...c.org> To: musl@...ts.openwall.com Cc: j-core@...ore.org Subject: Re: musl-cross-make / litecross improvements On Tue, May 03, 2016 at 11:57:05PM +0200, Szabolcs Nagy wrote: > * Szabolcs Nagy <nsz@...t70.net> [2016-05-03 22:16:22 +0200]: > > * Rich Felker <dalias@...c.org> [2016-05-03 14:02:30 -0400]: > > > On Tue, May 03, 2016 at 01:39:43PM +0200, Szabolcs Nagy wrote: > > > > i think the usr/ and lib64/ symlinks are useful > > > > (so it can be used as rootfs without fiddling > > > > with etc/ld-musl*.path). > > > > > > Yes. Is there a good way to override that in gcc or should we just > > > make the symlinks? > > > > > > > output/lib64 can be eliminated by > > COMMON_CONFIG += --libdir=/lib > > > > output/x86_64-linux-musl/lib64 install path is trickier: > > it is controlled by the $toolexeclibdir make variable. > > which is set according to $CC -print-multi-os-directory > > which is controlled by multilib and multilib_defaults from > > $CC -dumpspecs which comes from multilib.h generated by > > genmultilib based on parameters from config/i386/t-linux64 > > > > it was not clear if the t-linux64 thing could be overridden, but > > GCC_CONFIG += --with-multilib-list= > > fixes it (the lib dir is lib/ then). Hmm, on x86_64 Alpine, gcc -print-multi-os-directory shows ../lib but with -m32 it shows ../lib32. Does that mean there's some way to make it behave sanely? Or are they just patching it? Rich
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use? Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia and check out these guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.