06-28-2020, 07:33 AM
(This post was last modified: 06-28-2020, 07:38 AM by ninefathom.)
(06-26-2020, 11:03 AM)llsf Wrote: With regards to the challenges: well, you can just run makepkg with `CARCH=aarch64 makepkg` on x86_64, which gives you an '*-aarch64.pkg.tar.*'-package – but whether that's helpful is probably questionable ^^
That actually might do the trick. I'll see if I can get this magical "electron-ozone-aarch64" built within a day or two, and share the PKGBUILD if it works. And the pre-built package, because it takes forever. It will almost certainly be a fork of electron-ozone from AUR w/ a few additional dependencies and gn build flag changes.
(06-26-2020, 11:03 AM)llsf Wrote: More specifically with regards to electron: do you know why exactly (ie. some issues / known bugs) it's not possible to natively compile electron on aarch64? Considering it's "just a somewhat modified chrome" (yeah, it's probably a bit more complex than that), which can be built natively, maybe it's possible to get this done with less hassle.
Their build infrastructure makes all sorts of assumptions in various places that your current running architecture is x86_64. For example, it fetches a complete Debian chroot environment during the build process, and it always pulls the x86_64 (and for some reason also i386) versions. If you're cross-building, then it also pulls an aarch64 chroot. For another example, it always wants to bring its own copy of Python along to build with... and it always pulls the x86_64 version. In other words, it seems like in a tonne of places the build tool authors have likely just hard-coded "x86_64" or "i386" instead of detecting architecture.
See: https://github.com/electron/electron/issues/17288
