Today I tried "bootroot' a tool from uclibc people to generate a crosscompiler toolchain and basic chroot for many architectures. I think we can use it to generate the rootfs and toolchain for stali.
http://buildroot.uclibc.org i think that openwrt people use it. by having a toolchain and a chroot we can do our modifications on top of it. it will be easier to make the distro generable distro-independent and support many architectures in a shot. On Tue, 10 Aug 2010 17:32:51 -0400 m...@distasis.com wrote: > Tried reading the web site for information on sta.li and then did a search in > the mailing list for more information. I've been looking for the right Open > Source operating system to switch to from Windows and still have not found > one that fits my needs. Biggest issue is binary compatibility. I really > dislike the way you need to have all programs rebuilt every time glibc is > updated. From what I read about sta.li, it sounds like it may be a workable > solution to the binary compatibility issue. > > First question, has anyone considered using OpenWatcom ( > http://www.openwatcom.org/index.php/Main_Page ) as the main compiler for > sta.li? I read the progress on the list about bionic (which also sounded > like a good option). Am wondering if OpenWatcom would be an easier route. > I've used Watcom on Windows for years, even before it went Open Source, and I > know at one point the magazines were reporting it made the mostly highly > optimized binaries of any of the commercial compilers available for Windows. > There is a Linux port that's currently in the works. Don't know the current > status, but I do know that there's active work on it and you can download a > copy for Linux to test out. OpenWatcom supplies its own run time library, so > that should provide a way to avoid glibc. > > Second question, are there any pointers to documentation to install and use > sta.li on a system? I just went through attempting to install half a dozen > Linux distributions on my desktop including Slackware, Centos and OpenSuse > and only found one distribution I could successfully get to run so far > (Crunchbang). I'm not feeling very lucky at getting Linux systems going on > my main computer, especially without some good documentation or help. Would > be willing to help document if I can get access to information how to install > and get up and running. > > If sta.li gets to the point where someone like me could install it and get it > working on a system and it has a useable compiler, I would be more than happy > to start trying to get some Open Source programs building on it. I'm pretty > good at porting software. I've also been working on some ideas for building, > installing and managing programs on and off for about a year now. I really > like the idea I noticed mentioned on the list of using tarballs. I > personally prefer using what tools are already available to programmers and > not trying to change how programs were designed to build unless necessary. > On the other hand, as a programmer, I also like being able to get in and > customize a program so it suits my particular needs (sort of like when users > of dwm all customize it to their particular needs). > > I'd love to just find a stable, backward compatible Open Source system so I > can concentrate on what I like most, getting interesting and useful programs > to build and work on the system. Good luck with the sta.li project and if > there's something I can do to help, let me know. > > Sincerely, > Laura > http://www.distasis.com/cpp/dlin.htm >
