[asterisk-bugs] [Asterisk 0017464]: When cross-compiling, menuselect is built for target, not host architecture

[Asterisk Bug Tracker]

A NOTE has been added to this issue. 
====================================================================== 
https://issues.asterisk.org/view.php?id=17464 
====================================================================== 
Reported By:                pprindeville
Assigned To:                
====================================================================== 
Project:                    Asterisk
Issue ID:                   17464
Category:                   Core/BuildSystem
Reproducibility:            always
Severity:                   minor
Priority:                   normal
Status:                     new
Asterisk Version:           SVN 
JIRA:                        
Regression:                 No 
Reviewboard Link:            
SVN Branch (only for SVN checkouts, not tarball releases):  trunk 
SVN Revision (number only!): 267925 
Request Review:              
====================================================================== 
Date Submitted:             2010-06-03 23:32 CDT
Last Modified:              2010-06-04 13:21 CDT
====================================================================== 
Summary:                    When cross-compiling, menuselect is built for
target, not host architecture
Description: 
When building asterisk and supplying both CC and CC_FOR_BUILD, menuselect
gets compiled with target tools, not the host tools.


====================================================================== 

---------------------------------------------------------------------- 
 (0122983) tilghman (administrator) - 2010-06-04 13:21
 https://issues.asterisk.org/view.php?id=17464#c122983 
---------------------------------------------------------------------- 
I think you actually want to be using the terms 'build' and 'host'. 
'target' is only applicable when compiling a cross-compiler.  I agree that
specifying the HOST_CC is wrong to pass to the menuselect build target, but
I'm currently trying to figure out what the right approach would be. 

Issue History 
Date Modified    Username       Field                    Change               
====================================================================== 
2010-06-04 13:21 tilghman       Note Added: 0122983                          
======================================================================