Hey Benny!

 BP> most developments are on debian, and childs like amiga arch follow
 BP> some time, sadly

So I've noticed.  That's one of the reasons I started to grow my own way back
when.

 MK>> alternative would be to build a cross-compiled toolchain which
 MK>> I'd assume these days to be a x86_64 host.

 BP> that would be fail

Probably.  However I heard the same thing about a pure 64-bit cross-compiler
for raspi3 and managed to pull it off.  A native aarch64 was created on the
raspi3 using a slackwarearm as the initial boot/root system using a replacement
up to date kernel that was cross-compiled on a x86_64.  However after reading
about the amiga I have a feeling you are probably right about it failing.

 BP> the boot strap should be recompiled on real hardware

Agreed.  I've always believed that if a computer can't take care of itself it
isn't worth booting up in the first place.

 BP> plenti :)

Do you actually use any of them, and if so, for what purpose?

 BP> i dont play games :=)

Same here.

 BP> work space used was just 1.8GB while compile it

Did you do that on any of your amiga's?  If so how did you manage to provide
the work space needed?  Also, also why all the languages?  For gcc-6.4.0 all it
needs is gcc and g++.

Life is good,
Maurice

... Don't cry for me I have vi.
--- GNU bash, version 4.4.12(1)-release (x86_64-silvermont-linux-gnu)