I'm trying to cross-build LÖVE (https://love2d.org) for an ARM Linux device (Rockchip RK3066) from Ubuntu 16.04.
As the documentation says, I installed all dependencies on Ubuntu and was able to build it (for Ubuntu, as a test). Now I'm going for the cross-build.
Before building, I have to run ./configure. So far I've been able to get the toolchain's gcc compiler to be accepted, but when it looks for the dependencies, I get this error:
checking for luajit5.1... no
checking for luajit51... no
checking for luajit... no
configure: error: Package requirements (luajit) were not met:
No package 'luajit' found
Consider adjusting the PKG_CONFIG_PATH environment variable if you
installed software in a non-standard prefix.
Alternatively, you may set the environment variables lua_CFLAGS
and lua_LIBS to avoid the need to call pkg-config.
See the pkg-config man page for more details.
Could this be fixed by cross-building luajit for the device and add it to the toolchain binaries, or could I just try to make the ./configure script look for the luajit I installed in Ubuntu?
If it's the latter, would someone kindly point me on the right direction? I've opened like 20 pages already with a similar error message and none of them had a valid answer.
Thanks a lot in advance.
Related
So I've upgraded to a newer version of Linux kernel using Yocto. The new kernel version is for 4.1.15 and runs on an iMX6 chip. I've also included openssh-server, tools-sdk, and tools-debug for development recipes. The problem is that when I connect to build I get the following error:
loadlocale.c:130: _nl_intern_locale_data: Assertion `cnt < (sizeof
(_nl_value_type_LC_COLLATE) / sizeof (_nl_value_type_LC_COLLATE[0]))'
failed
Now if I type into the command prompt sh -c "LANG=en_US" I get the same error as above. If I type in sh -c "LANG=/usr/lib/locale/en_US" then I do not get an error. When I type locale everything is listed as POSIX and when I type locale -a I get:
C
POSIX
en_GB
en_US
The last two are stored under /usr/lib/locale. My version of gcc is 5.2 and my glibc is v2.22. I've looked all over the internet for other solutions but they are either for Ubuntu where the package manager comes in handy or it's some really specific fix like editing a file that I don't have in my Yocto build.
Edit:
The machine is for a SMARC-FiMX6 SoM and the instructions are here. I'm not sure what branch of Yocto is being pulled down.
After troubleshooting the problem is from the glibc library. A patch, #114739, is on the openembedded website which details what to do to fix this issue. Just patch the file, rebuild, and the issue is fixed. See here for details, the patch is at the bottom of the page.
I enconter a problem I hope to be solved quickly.
I have grace to BUILDROOT compile a Linux zImage Kernel, build a rootfs, have a bootloader, so everething is right.
But at the boot, the system is so minimal that i don't have got some package manager like apt-get, yum, etc....
Despite the fact i've got the network (wget is possible), I don't know how to have a simply gcc in my host (Buildroot don't permit to compile gcc anymore)
or more simply a package manager.
It is so boring to cross compile everything that I think the better solution is to apt-get packages, resolve dependencies and install it for an ARM architecture..
I recompile with Package manager options including IPKG and OPKG but the repositories don't work and the commands return nothing (I.E. ipkg --list, etc..)
Did someone had the same problems and what is the best way to have a good Package Manager on a minimal system compiled and build grace to Buildroot.
What is the best way to have anymore a Native compile toolchain on the ARM host ?
Thanks to your answers
My purpose is to natively compile my code including -lm -lpthread and LIRC module and header files on this minimal host system.
Stefan, France
---- additional informations ---
hello,
i refresh this tag for set informations :
recently buildroot does no longer permit natively compile gcc package
even if make and other tools are available on the recent buildroot distribution
gcc and other tags are marked as deprecated
so it is needed / obligated to cross compile on the host
so what i did
for convenience, i've the Makefile for my code with dependencies
for pthread and lirc_client
If anybody interested, ask me,
stef, France
The Buildroot reference documentation has plenty of details about these questions. Please see http://buildroot.org/downloads/manual/manual.html#faq-no-compiler-on-target and http://buildroot.org/downloads/manual/manual.html#faq-no-binary-packages.
I've added dpkg inside buildroot in order to have dpkg on my board... it was really easy to do.
The only thing I had to hack is to create a fake ldconfig.
Ive been cross compiling my unit-tests to ensure they pass on all the platforms of interest, e.g. x86-linux, win32, win64, arm-linux
they unit tests require the CUnit library
So I've had to cross compile that also for each platform
That comes with its own autoconf stuff so you can easily cross-build it by specifying --host for configure
The question I have is where is the 'correct' place to have the CUnit libs installed for the various platforms? i.e. what should I set --prefix to for configure?
My initial guess was:
/usr/local/<platform>/lib/Cunit
i.e. setting --prefix /usr/local/<platform>
e.g. --prefix /usr/local/arm-linux-gnueabihf
which on sudo make install gives you:
/usr/local/arm-linux-gnueabihf/doc/CUnit
/usr/local/arm-linux-gnueabihf/include/CUnit
/usr/local/arm-linux-gnueabihf/lib
/usr/local/arm-linux-gnueabihf/share/CUnit
Obviously, if i don't specify a prefix for configure, each platform build overwrites the prev one which is no good
to then successfully link to these platform specific libs i need to specify the relevant lib dir for each target in its own LDFLAGS in the Makefile
Is this the right approach? Have I got the dir structure/location right for this sort of cross-build stuff? I assume there must be a defacto approach but not sure what it is..
possibly configure is supposed to handle all this stuff for me? maybe I just have to set --target correctly and perhaps --enable-multilib? all with --prefix=/usr/local?
some of the error msgs i get suggest /usr/lib/gcc-cross might be involve?
From reading more about cross compilation and the Gnu configure and build system it seems that I should just be setting the --target option for the configure step
but how do you know what the target names are? are they some fragment of the cross compiler names?
The 3 cross compilers I am using are:
arm-linux-gnueabihf-gcc-4.8
i686-w64-mingw32-gcc
x86_64-w64-mingw32-gcc
allowing me to cross-compile for ARM, win32 and win64
my host is 32 bit ubuntu, which I think might be --host i386-linux, but it seems that configure should get this right as its default
This is the procedure I finally figured out and got to work:
for each of my 3 cross-build tools (arm, win32, win64) my calls to configure looked like:
./configure --host=arm-linux-gnueabihf --build=i686-pc-linux-gnu --prefix=/usr/local/arm-linux-gnueabihf
./configure --host=i686-w64-mingw32 --build=i686-pc-linux-gnu --prefix=/usr/local/i686-w64-mingw32
./configure --host=x86_64-w64-mingw32 --build=i686-pc-linux-gnu --prefix=/usr/local/x86_64-w64-mingw32
each of these was followed by make, sudo make install
prior to calling configure for the arm cross build i had to do:
ln -s /usr/bin/arm-linux-gnueabihf-gcc-4.8 /usr/bin/arm-linux-gnueabihf-gcc
this was because the compiler had -4.8 tagged on the end so configure could not correctly 'guess' the name of the compiler
this issue did not apply to either the win32 or win64 mingw compilers
Note an additional gotcha was that when subsequently trying to link to these cross compiled CUnit libs, none of the cross compilers seemed to look in /usr/local/include by default so I had to manually add:
-I/usr/local/include
for each object file build
e.g. i added /usr/local/include to INCLUDE_DIRS in my Makefile
all this finally seems to have given me correctly cross built CUnit libs and I have successfully linked to them to produce cross built unit test binaries for each of the target platforms.
not at all easy and I would venture to call the configure option settings 'counter-intuitive' - as ever it is worth taking the time to read the relevant docs - this snippet was pertinent:
There are three system names that the build knows about: the machine
you are building on (build), the machine that you are building for
(host), and the machine that GCC will produce code for (target). When
you configure GCC, you specify these with --build=, --host=, and
--target=.
Specifying the host without specifying the build should be avoided, as
configure may (and once did) assume that the host you specify is also
the build, which may not be true.
If build, host, and target are all the same, this is called a native.
If build and host are the same but target is different, this is called
a cross. If build, host, and target are all different this is called a
canadian (for obscure reasons dealing with Canada's political party
and the background of the person working on the build at that time).
If host and target are the same, but build is different, you are using
a cross-compiler to build a native for a different system. Some people
call this a host-x-host, crossed native, or cross-built native.
and also:
When people configure a project like './configure', man often meets
these three confusing options, which are more related with
cross-compilation
--host: In which system the generated program will run.
--build: In which system the program will be built.
--target: this option is only used to build a cross-compiling
toolchain. When the tool chain generates executable program, in which target
system the program will run.
An example of tslib (a mouse driver library)
'./configure --host=arm-linux --build=i686-pc-linux-gnu': the
dynamically library is built on a x86 linux computer but will be used
for a embedded arm linux system.
I'm trying to get a development environment going for programming with MPI and C. I had a look around and found Eclipse Parallel Tools Platform.
I am experiencing lots of errors of the form Type 'MPI_Status' could not be resolved and other resolution errors from vanilla eclipse-ptp-kepler. I'm on Linux x86_64 (Ubuntu 12.04.3 LTS) using the helloworld MPI C example with the Linux GCC Toolchain.
Also perhaps noteworthy: Launching the default "Local C/C++ Application" Run Configuration gives Launch failed. Binary not found
Any help would be greatly appreciated! Suggestions about other development environments are welcome if you are unsure of the solution to this problem.
Thanks for reading!
MPI_Status is typically defined in mpi.h, so you'll have to make sure it's in your include path. The "launch failed" error also suggests that maybe the mpirun, mpiexec or mpicc programs are missing from your executable path. You might have to either set up an MPI implementation like OpenMPI locally and point PTP to it, or follow the directions here to set up a remote build: http://help.eclipse.org/kepler/index.jsp?topic=%2Forg.eclipse.ptp.doc.user%2Fhtml%2Ftoc.html
you need to pass the flag -fopenmp to gcc to enable OpenMP, don't forget that OpenMP is a technology that needs support from the compiler; on other implementation the flag may vary, check the docs for your compiler.
I have some old hardware with an old version of say SuSE linux running on it. Now I have this fancy development machine running Ubuntu 9.10. Some of the tools I use to compile my C app (written in Python 2.6.x) are not available on the old SuSe box. So... is it possible to compile for that old machine on my dev box?
I have the following steps in mind, but would like to cross-check before venturing off into this quest:
1. Find out which static/shared libs my app needs and find/build target version of them
2. Also find the corresponding header files
3. Feed the correct flags to gcc to use the target headers and libraries
4. Feed the correct flags to gcc to use the correct architecture (i386/i686), or do I need a cross-compilation toolchain.
5. Compile, upload and enjoy ;-)
I regularly use avr-gcc and cc65, both are cross compiling. I know that you set up a coss compiler for developing something like a gumstix, so it should be possible to do the same for old/other Linux distros, not?
C
The way I would approach this is grab your oldmachine:/usr/lib and oldmachine:/usr/include so you have e.g. newmachine:/oldmachinecompiler/usr/{lib|include} then build a cross compiler setting --sysroot to newmachine:/oldmachinecompiler/
This is really the only way to ensure that any library requirements (including libc) in your program are compatible with oldmachine.