Halassy Zoltán
2012-06-22 10:46:00 UTC
Hello!
(speaking about x86 and x86_64)
I've read after going no-multilib, there is no way back (at least there
is no straight way to do, though hacks exists).
I'm wondering what makes it difficult. The first issue is, gcc can make
32bit object files, but the linker cannot create executables as 32bit
libgcc.a is missing. On multilib systems, gcc itself is a 64bit
executable, only with a few extra 32bit .a and .so files (so effectively
a cross-compiler on a 64-bit system for 32-bit systems). I didn't try,
but I can't see why one couldn't compile a multilib gcc on a
non-multilib system. Does linking those extra 32bit .so and .a files
require some information from the not-present 32bit libc which causes
the problem?
(speaking about x86 and x86_64)
I've read after going no-multilib, there is no way back (at least there
is no straight way to do, though hacks exists).
I'm wondering what makes it difficult. The first issue is, gcc can make
32bit object files, but the linker cannot create executables as 32bit
libgcc.a is missing. On multilib systems, gcc itself is a 64bit
executable, only with a few extra 32bit .a and .so files (so effectively
a cross-compiler on a 64-bit system for 32-bit systems). I didn't try,
but I can't see why one couldn't compile a multilib gcc on a
non-multilib system. Does linking those extra 32bit .so and .a files
require some information from the not-present 32bit libc which causes
the problem?