From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Thomas Petazzoni Date: Thu, 18 Aug 2016 23:18:50 +0200 Subject: [Buildroot] BuildRoot cannot build powerpc64 In-Reply-To: <532ce6e0-de27-9a2a-f062-179a4fa3248e@mind.be> References: <57b3aeb6944cf_7ec33f915a8b1b9c298e6@ultri3.mail> <20160817193721.0cc1466d@free-electrons.com> <532ce6e0-de27-9a2a-f062-179a4fa3248e@mind.be> Message-ID: <20160818231850.4072ddf2@free-electrons.com> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: buildroot@busybox.net Hello, On Thu, 18 Aug 2016 20:02:31 +0200, Arnout Vandecappelle wrote: > > The only C library that supports PowerPC64 today is glibc. > > > > But glibc does not support static linking. > > > > Hence there is no solution to do a statically linked rootfs on > > PowerPC64 today. > > Perhaps we should remove the static/shared libs options to the toolchain menu, > and make them depend on the libc choice rather than the other way round. That > way, we're sure that we never run into such impossible situations. > > Actually also some other options are more fitting in the toolchain menu IMHO, > like debug/optimization options and SSP. I personally don't like this, and instead would like to keep separated the options that affect the build of all components (SSP or not, debug/optimization, shared/static) from the options that configure the toolchain itself. Thomas -- Thomas Petazzoni, CTO, Free Electrons Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering http://free-electrons.com