[Buildroot] Python standard library problems

Maxime Ripard maxime.ripard at free-electrons.com
Mon Aug 29 15:58:29 UTC 2011

Hi Pedro,

I've just sent a patch for this issue, could you test it ?


On 16/08/2011 10:22, Maxime Ripard wrote:
> Hi,
> On 12/08/2011 19:47, Pedro Sanchez wrote:
>> Thanks Maxime for looking at this. Indeed, my workstation is running
>> Linux 64 bits. I'm glad to know that cross-compiling Python goes well on
>> a 32-bit OS. I'll have to fire up a VM just to run BR :-|
> Or maybe we can just fix this bug :)
>> On the specific problem we have, I don't have any insight yet. All I can
>> tell you is that I did the exercise of building BR w/Python using three
>> different toolchains (CodeSourcery, Crosstool-ng, and uClibC) and I got
>> exactly the same disappointing results**.
> Neither am I. I don't get why a cross-toolchain which runs fine could
> fail to build a specific module. After all, on 32 and 64 bits, we use
> the exact same toolchains (at least for the Code Sourcery one.).
> After all, the host-python should be compiled for 64 bits using the
> native toolchain, and the target one compiled (in our case at least) for
> 32 bits, with the cross-toolchain. There shouldn't be any 64-to-32 bits
> compilation at all.
>> Maybe this can help?
>> http://blog.devork.be/2009/02/compiling-32-bit-python-on-amd64.html
> Yep, I ran into that trick last week too. I'm not sure this is a good
> one though. This is a good quick fix, but I wonder what will happen if
> your target is a 64bits architecture ? Moreover, this adds the
> dependency to gcc-multilib.
> Peter, what do you think of it ?
> Maxime

Maxime Ripard, Free Electrons
Kernel, drivers, real-time and embedded Linux
development, consulting, training and support.

More information about the buildroot mailing list