Support aarch64-linux for docker on macos #53
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
|
I'm just curious do we had to use docker based build for aarch64/linux if we give up old glibc compatibility? |
|
@kawamuray I think we don't need to use the docker based build - but one reason to use this would be to test locally against an image used in production. In that case you might have an image with an old glibc that still needs the compatibility. |
|
I also should mention that I based some of this on the wasmtime project's build system again - they also use an https://github.com/bytecodealliance/wasmtime/tree/main/ci/docker |
|
Understood, thanks :) |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
This adds a build configuration for aarch64-linux, which is used when running a Linux docker container on a aarch64 Mac.
A different docker image base is needed to get a aarch64 cross-compiler, and there's a small tradeoff in terms of GCC compatibility from using a newer image in this case (
ubuntu:16:04vscentos:7).I also fixed an issue that had appeared with the release build - the directory for JAVA_HOME in the docker image was too specific and changed along with the package being upgraded. It should be using a more generic symlinked directory now.