Re: [ft-devel] FreeType 2.3.8 released

[mpsuzuki]

On Fri, 16 Jan 2009 13:13:22 +1000
"Andrey V. Panov" <address@hidden> wrote:

>On 16 Jan 2009, address@hidden wrote:
>> Before all, thank you for report. Could you describe more detail
>> on your "multilib"? The compiler's pathname x86_64-slamd64-linux-gcc
>> looks like as if it is cross-building (on i386 machine), but other
>> pathnames (e.g. /usr/lib, etc) look like as if it is native-building.
>
>It is slamd64, a port of slackware to x86_64 platform. This system uses 
>multilib, that is /usr/lib, /lib, ... are used for 32-bit libraries 
>and /usr/lib64, /lib64, ... for 64-bit ones. This typical configuration for 
>multilibrary system and it is recommended by fhs 2.3, section 6.1.5, 
>http://www.pathname.com/fhs/pub/fhs-2.3.pdf .

Thank you for the reference. On slamd64, "cc" generates i386 binary
and it is required to use x86_64-slamd64-linux-gcc for amd64 binary?
Or, "cc" and "x86_64-slamd64-linux-gcc" are same command?

The reason why I want to know such is that: current FreeType2's
configure is ready for generic cross-building by GNU autotools.

If "cc" on slamd64 generates i386 binary, the building amd64
binaries on slamd64 can be handled as a variation of cross-
building for amd64 on i386 platform (with irregular locations
of amd64 libraries).
On the other hand, if "cc" on slamd64 generates amd64 binary,
I have to check if GNU autotools can detect native X11 libraries 
which is located by FHS manner.

Regards,
mpsuzuki