Patrice Mandin wrote:
Speaking of RPMs, I would like to cross-build RPMs of uptodate packages for MiNT, but the RPM format does not make things easy for cross compilation. Or maybe I did not find the right infos to do so.
Hello, Patrice.One day I tried to cross-build an RPM, but I went into trouble. I tried to use the latest RPM tool, but it produces RPMs incompatible with the (old) SpareMiNT one. I also went to the conclusion that RPM is not designed for cross-compiling.
I managed to partially cross-build an RPM of binutils 2.18 last year. Basically, I cross-built the binaries, then I switched to ARAnyM in order to use the SpareMiNT RPM utility more or less like zip to make an archive. This is a very bad method, but it was good enough to build a working binary RPM.
This experimental work (including build script) is available here: http://vincent.riviere.free.fr/soft/m68k-atari-mint/archives/unsupported/Note that I made a (small) special effort to make the new binutils 2.20 buildable with GCC 2.95. So they should be buildable from MiNT, by using the standard, good RPM method. In order to do that, a recent version of texinfo must be installed, I believe that the RPM built by Mark should be correct. It can be found here:
http://storage.atari-source.org:8000/atari/personal/package_staging/About GCC, the patch is perfectly correct, but I never found a clean way to build it, because of its interdependencies with the MiNTLib. I never looked at how the RPMs of GCC 2.95 were built.
Also, all libraries should be built for multilib usage (i.e. 000/020/020-60/coldfire builds).
I remember you sent to me long ago an additional patch for GCC for enabling a multilib for 68020 without FPU. I didn't include it in my patch yet. We should decide what set of multilibs should be "officially" supported by MiNT.
Well, I think that multilib problem is secondary, it could be treated after making some a first set of RPMs.
-- Vincent Rivière