help building cross compilation ia32 to ia64

[Kai Ruottu]

Tim Prince wrote:
>> Although your 'ia64-linux-gnu' Linux distro would be old, with 
>> 'glibc-2.2.2' or something,
> Why this propaganda?  If you sincerely believe OP is confused between 
> x86-64 and ia64, say so or ask for clarification.
 Ok, I looked at that (HP) site and there were both 'amd64' and 'ia64' 
toolchains...  Why I wrote that
"propaganda", maybe came from the fact that I myself first saw that 
'ia64' being 'x86_64' and didn't
care to edit everything away...  Or the current flu mixed my brains... 
Sorry for this!
>   I don't see much relevance of your opinion on "mainline distros" 
> apparently excluding the SuSE, RH, and Debian which are in widespread 
> use.
 Yes, Debian and the RHL-ES seem still to support Itanium... No evidence 
about  SuSE, nothing seen
about 'ia64', not even about 'x86_64' on their "SuSE Linux 10" pages, a 
'x86' server product seemed to be
available...

> OP presumably has a target in mind.
 But couldn't tell what on earth that is... Maybe it is "WinNT4.0 for 
ia64" !
>   I'm somewhat amazed by the contrast in your advice to use a current 
> release or newer version of binutils, but not to use anything else 
> from the last 3 years.  RH 4.3 or newer definitely have advantages 
> over earlier RH, aside from needing one of the binutils upgrades you 
> mentioned.
 GIGO - "Garbage In - Garbage Out" !  People get bullshit if they ask 
using bullshit !

 Ok, too many questions like "I have a problem, can you help me?" are 
seen and when seeing that one either
doesn't answer at all or then switches the "lecture mode" on :-(  The 
least what could be expected is that there
were at least some clues for what on earth the problem is!

 Whether someone who cannot see any difference between  'Linux/ia64', 
'AIX/ia64', 'HP-UX/ia64 and
'FreeBSD/ia64' plus that 'WinNT4.0/ia64' (if it existed, maybe 
'Win2k/ia64' too) but see them all as 'ia64',
could succeed in any builds without continous hand-holding, is quite 
unclear....  :-)

 Anyway one serious problem is that the downloaded tools were for the 
Linux/ia64 host, not for the 'ia32'
host !  I checked the 'tco-gcc-20061029.inst.tar.gz' package, its 'gcc' 
told :

$ /data1/opt/toolchain/tco-20061029/bin # file gcc
gcc: ELF 64-bit LSB executable, IA-64 (Intel 64 bit architecture), 
version 1 (SYSV), for GNU/Linux 2.4.1, dynamically linked (uses shared 
libs), for GNU/Linux 2.4.1, not stripped

 The best approach in cases like this could be at least to tell :

1.   What is the host system ?  Fedora 5 executables running OK on Red 
Hat 7.3 doesn't sound that clear...
      If one downloads prebuilt binaries, their makers usually have some 
'bleeding edge' system :-(

2.   What is the target system?  Producing a toolchain with 
'gcc-4.1.1-glibc-2.5' and then trying to run the
     produced apps on a "Red Hat Linux 7.2/ia64" doesn't either sound 
very sane....