On Tue, Oct 03, 2006 at 09:53:42PM +0200, Christian Biere wrote:
>George Georgalis wrote:
>> ...oh, so the binary packages need to be built on the same machine
>> they run on... I didn't know that.
>
>Not the same *machine*, just the same architecture and operating
>system with a compatible release. Of course, you have to refrain from
>using compile flags such as --march=athlon if the package is supposed
>to run on a Duron, Pentium, i486 etc. As long as you have the
>necessary COMPAT_* flags in your NetBSD kernel (GENERIC has them all),
>you can also run pretty old binary packages. There are binary
>packages available online, you don't necessarily *have* to compile
>them yourself.

Good info, thanks.

>> I imagine this won't change
>> anytime soon/ever because each package owner would have to make
>> their package cross-compile-able (at minimum), ugh.
>
>I don't think it would be difficult to make pkgsrc itself
>cross-compile-friendly but as you say, individual packages are often
>not cross-compilable because they execute compiled test programs or
>assume the compile-time environment is identical to the runtime
>environment.

Humm, well cross-compile friendly pkgsrc sounds good to me (tm).
I don't need to build openoffice or anything like that, just a
handful of sysadmin tools; but nfs builds is working well enough
for my present issue.


>> >I guess in this special case (amd64 + i386) you could use Xen
>> >with a guest domain running NetBSD/i386.
> 
>> would like to get up to speed on zen sometime.
>
>The pronunciation is quite different.

apparently the spelling too. thanks for the comments. :)

// George


-- 
George Georgalis, systems architect, administrator <IXOYE><