Getting cross compilation to work.

[Poul-Henning Kamp]

--------
Per Buer writes:


> All the RST generation is quite easy to do in Python, except "params.rst",
> which leverages a lot of vinyl code like:
>
> #if defined(HAVE_ACCEPT_FILTERS)

So that kind is easy:  It comes out of config.h and python can read that.

An alternate take could be that we should always have the all the
parameters, but their value might be a constant "N/A" if the
parameter does not apply.  (Not sure I have an opinion on that.)

> There is sysconf(_SC_THREAD_STACK_MIN) and MCF_ParamConf("thread_pools",
> "%d", MAX_THREAD_POOLS) which will affect params.rst will end up looking.

So this is where it gets interesting.

By definition the documentation cannot contain correct numerical
values (min/max/default) for "dynamic" parameters.

I know we stick 'examplary' numbers in the docs today, but that's
more by accident of implementation than by intention.

If I were starting over, I think I would prefer the doc to say
"determined at runtime" rather than contain numbers which may or
may not have anything to do with reality.

Finally, of course, I think there are a parameters which serve
no actual purpose (any longer) and can & ahould be removed.

> So, autoconf has CC_FOR_BUILD, [...]

I'm really not keen on wading deeper into the autocrap sump if we
can avoid it.

As to 32 bit:

Yeah, those days have come and gone, and if I recall right we have
already announced that 32bit would not be supported in this major
release, and then, as we often do, forgot to actually remove it.

Maybe we should start out with a "spring cleaning" and ditch
32bit for good and audit the parameters for any which are
surplus to requirements.

Poul-Henning

PS: You have still not revealed why cross-building is important/desirable ?

-- 
Poul-Henning Kamp       | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20
phk at FreeBSD.ORG         | TCP/IP since RFC 956
FreeBSD committer       | BSD since 4.3-tahoe    
Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence.