Re: [RFC] Simplify MinGW canadian crosses

[Daniel Jacobowitz <drow@false.org>]

On Tue, Aug 29, 2006 at 05:35:40PM +0200, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> Sorry, but that's not the deal.  Using my patches, you can install a
> standard source tree, including gcc, gdb, binutils, [...], and last but
> not least the winsup directory on, say, a Linux machine, and then build
> a complete three stage canadian cross on *Linux*, which generates a
> i686-pc-mingw32-x-arm-elf toolchain.  You don't have to install the MinGW
> libraries and header files somewhere on the Linux machine and tweak the
> build process to find them.  Everything comes out of the same source
> tree.  From my point of view this simplifies stuff, it doesn't make it
> more complicated.

Are your changes affecting the i686-pc-mingw32 targeted compiler built
in the middle?  Your description suggested that it affected the build
process of the final canadian cross compiler.  If you're changing that
second one, then none of my objections are relevant.

I guess what I'm asking is: why doesn't "make install" when you've
built the i686-pc-mingw32 compiler install everything you need to use
that compiler to build i686-pc-mingw32 hosted applications?

CodeSourcery does something not much different every day, by the way.
We configure a mingw32 compiler with its own prefix, build it, make
install, and then everything works - no "tweaking the build process"
to find anything.

I'm sure making these scripts more complicated simplifies whatever
outside scripts you're using to build the whole three stage deal; but
everyone has to carry the cost of the complexity in these central
scripts, not just the people using your build process.

You cross posted to two closed lists, by the way.  I have dropped them,
because I'm tired of getting the bounces.

-- 
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery