Go Job Hunting at the LQ Job Marketplace
Go Back > Forums > Linux Forums > Linux - General
User Name
Linux - General This Linux forum is for general Linux questions and discussion.
If it is Linux Related and doesn't seem to fit in any other forum then this is the place.


  Search this Thread
Old 03-26-2009, 04:33 PM   #1
Registered: Mar 2009
Location: Hong Kong
Distribution: Fedora
Posts: 184

Rep: Reputation: 41
Is there a way to compile Grub (1.96) on a x86_64-system?

As the title says I am trying to compile Grub 1.96 on a x86_64 system.
There is some compilation-problem and from what I read something expects to be compiled 32-bit.

Can't provide the actual error right now, but in a few hours the system should be finished compiling and then I can test and post the error if necessary.

So, does anybody here know if there is a way to compile Grub? The system is a pure 64-bit system, not multi-lib.
Old 03-27-2009, 02:24 AM   #2
Gentoo support team
Registered: May 2008
Location: Lucena, Córdoba (Spain)
Distribution: Gentoo
Posts: 4,052

Rep: Reputation: 379Reputation: 379Reputation: 379Reputation: 379
If you mean 0.96, then nope. You can only compile it as a 32 bits program. Hence, you can compile it on an x86_64 system, but only if you have all the needed libs for 32 bits. The headers will be the same though, so no problem in that department. Gentoo does this.

However, is there a reason why you do really need to install it on the system? You can just install it on the boot sector using a livecd and forget about it. Unlike with lilo, you don't need to run grub each time that you modify your grub.conf, so once installed you can just forget about it.

If you truly mean 1.96 (what's to be grub2 one day), then I have no idea, but I thought that one of the advantages of grub2 was that it compiled in many architectures, and not only x86. So my guess is that it should work in amd64.

Last edited by i92guboj; 03-27-2009 at 02:27 AM.
Old 03-27-2009, 05:41 AM   #3
Registered: Mar 2009
Location: Hong Kong
Distribution: Fedora
Posts: 184

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 41
Yes, I really mean 1.96, the version that some day in a distant future is supposed to turn become Grub2.

Thing is that I am working on a LFS-based distro which is installed by a pile of shell-scripts. I already have Lilo in there, but wanted to offer Grub as an alternative.

I'm not even sure anymore why I actually decided to use 1.96. I think it wasn't just to have the latest version, I think it was something about filesystem-support.

My system is finally done now, so I can test around and see what I can do about this problem, and two problems I just ran into on this last test, but these I don't really worry about. The only thing giving me a headache is Grub.

Maybe I'll try it the "Lilo-way", using the Bin86-package to compile the parts which have to be 32-bit.


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Host x86_64, Can I compile for x86_32??? webquinty Linux - Newbie 5 11-26-2008 01:14 PM
compile kernel for x86_64 henkees Slackware 7 10-10-2008 03:36 PM
x86_64 library compile problem zypo Fedora 1 10-10-2005 05:46 AM
kernel compile on x86_64 fails acidjuice Linux - Software 1 05-06-2005 05:30 PM
Can't get kernel to compile as x86_64 arch... Electrode Linux - Software 22 12-18-2003 10:11 AM

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:25 PM.

Main Menu
Write for LQ is looking for people interested in writing Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute content, let us know.
Main Menu
RSS1  Latest Threads
RSS1  LQ News
Twitter: @linuxquestions
Facebook: linuxquestions Google+: linuxquestions
Open Source Consulting | Domain Registration