cross compiling nethack

External Since: Jun 26, 2006 Posts: 184

"sjdevnull@yahoo.com" <sjdevnull.RemoveThis@yahoo.com> wrote in
news:90713e0e-a4e4-4725-92d2-e7f0f320448d@n20g2000hsh.googlegroups.com:

> On Jan 1, 4:32 pm, chuckcar <ch....RemoveThis@nil.car> wrote:

>> >> it says right in the "readmes" if you're cross-compiling to check
>> >> the CXX variable full stop.
>>
>> > What readmes? CXX is not mentioned in any of the nethack source
>> > readmes, except for the Qt-specific win/Qt/Install.Qt
>>
>> Ok, my memory fade:
>>
>> in Makefile.src in /sys/unix:
>>
>> #
>> # For cross-compiling, eg. with gcc on Linux (see also CXX
>> further down): # CC = arm-linux-gcc
>> #
>> #
>> and as is says:
>>
>> # The Qt and Be window systems are written in C++, while the rest of
>> # NetHack is standard C. If using Qt, uncomment the LINK line here
>> to get # the C++ libraries linked in.
>> CXXFLAGS = $(CFLAGS) -I. -I$(QTDIR)/include
>> CXX=g++
>> #LINK=g++
>> # For cross-compiling, eg. with gcc on Linux (see also CC
>> further up): #CXX=arm-linux-g++
>> #LINK=arm-linux-gcc
>>
>> Note: two *different* lines. I seem to remember reading somewhere
>> that the crosscompiler is part of the c++ compiler not gcc itself.

>> Note there is no reference to QT there at all.
>
> I'm just saying, CXX doesn't affect non-Qt builds (except on Beos).

Ah, did *you* write the makefiles? My guess is no, so you do not know that.
Certainly I doubt whether you have successfully compiled the arm version of
nethack even. And those two things are what matters here: The Makefile
*says* to uncomment those lines if you are doing a cross-compile to arm
so you do it, period. Argue with the dev team if you like, but that's
what it says.

> There's no harm in having it, hence it being set unconditionally by
> the Makefile (unlike LINK, which would break non-C++ builds on
> machines that don't have the C++ libs installed), but it's completely
> ignored unless you try to invoke a C++ compiler--which nethack's build
> process doesn't do unless you're building Qt (or Beos).
>
Oh come on, I show you the *exact* lines from the src Makefile where and
why it says you *have* to specify the arm paramater along with
absolutely no references for the QT library and you *still* say it's
nonsence?? Or are you going to *now* say that only under BEOS does the
arm version of nethack work?

--
(setq (chuck nil) car(chuck) )

External Since: Aug 24, 2005 Posts: 275

On Jan 3, 12:15 am, chuckcar <ch....RemoveThis@nil.car> wrote:
> "sjdevn...@yahoo.com" <sjdevn....RemoveThis@yahoo.com> wrote innews:c139abea-5ce0-495a-abd7-0db20897d83b@i3g2000hsf.googlegroups.com:
>
> > On Jan 2, 7:58 am, chuckcar <ch....RemoveThis@nil.car> wrote:
> >> "sjdevn...@yahoo.com" <sjdevn....RemoveThis@yahoo.com> wrote
> >> innews:90713e0e-a4e4-4725-92d2-e7f0f320448d@n20g2000hsh.googlegroups.c
> >> om:
> > Yes, and I was just trying to explain that they're misleading. But if
> > it makes you feel happy go ahead and set it. There's no harm in doing
> > so.
>
> I'll tell you what the harm is: telling some OP that probably couldn't
> figure this out for himself that anything but what other have already
> suggested and hasn't worked isn't going to. For crips sake, I'm the only
> person suggesting a possible fix here. If you can *show* what I'm saying
> *isn't* going to work, fine state that, but if you just want to voice an
> inconsequential opinion, well, as a Mark Twain like humorist from my
> country says, you have nothing to say.

Geeze, I was trying to point out that just changing CXX wasn't going
to help out so the OP wouldn't waste time. If you want to try it
that's cool too, though, no skin off my back. I'm not sure where your
persecution complex came from, nor your need to repeatedly attack
people who are just offering useful input, but have fun with it.