From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 19565 invoked by alias); 6 Sep 2009 09:41:13 -0000 Received: (qmail 19556 invoked by uid 22791); 6 Sep 2009 09:41:12 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.1 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_JMF_BL X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from smtp27.orange.fr (HELO smtp27.orange.fr) (80.12.242.94) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Sun, 06 Sep 2009 09:41:07 +0000 Received: from me-wanadoo.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mwinf2703.orange.fr (SMTP Server) with ESMTP id 9F8071C0009F; Sun, 6 Sep 2009 11:41:04 +0200 (CEST) Received: from me-wanadoo.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mwinf2703.orange.fr (SMTP Server) with ESMTP id 911021C000A6; Sun, 6 Sep 2009 11:41:04 +0200 (CEST) Received: from r-lnx-leminkainen.bzh.lan (ARennes-252-1-6-178.w83-195.abo.wanadoo.fr [83.195.37.178]) by mwinf2703.orange.fr (SMTP Server) with ESMTP id 6C4E51C0009F; Sun, 6 Sep 2009 11:41:04 +0200 (CEST) From: "Yann E. MORIN" To: crossgcc@sourceware.org Subject: Re: crosstool-ng: No CT_TOOLS_WRAPPER set when building a standard CROSS... Date: Sun, 06 Sep 2009 09:41:00 -0000 User-Agent: KMail/1.9.9 Cc: Joachim Nilsson References: <4AA37053.1000705@vmlinux.org> <200909061107.44797.yann.morin.1998@anciens.enib.fr> <4AA37EF2.7040203@vmlinux.org> In-Reply-To: <4AA37EF2.7040203@vmlinux.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200909061141.02410.yann.morin.1998@anciens.enib.fr> X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact crossgcc-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: crossgcc-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2009-09/txt/msg00016.txt.bz2 Joachim, All, On Sunday 06 September 2009 11:20:50 Joachim Nilsson wrote: > On 09/06/2009 11:07 AM, Yann E. MORIN wrote: > > But in fact there's a litle bit to it that I'd like to fix, especially > > the menuconfig order: it would be better if the user does not have to > > go back and forth in the menuconfig to set options. In this case, setting > > the comp libs would uncover anoption at the begining, and the user may > > miss it. Moving the choice down into the comp lib menu will be better. > That's a good idea, I was actually quite confused by this initially. Yeah, I've done some re-ordering recently, so that should not happen any longer. > But I can see the logic in having it with the toolchain options as well, > but that same logic could also be applied to saying that it should be > with the C Compiler options. I.e., when selecting a gcc >= 4.3.x ... > ... maybe the companion libraries section should appear as a subsection > of the C Compiler menu when selecting a gcc >= 4.3.x? (Some of) the companion libs can be used by binutils and gdb as well, so it can not be a sub-menu of gcc. It's just that gcc _requires_ them, while binutils and gdb _can_ use them, but don't _require_ them. Regards, Yann E. MORIN. -- .-----------------.--------------------.------------------.--------------------. | Yann E. MORIN | Real-Time Embedded | /"\ ASCII RIBBON | Erics' conspiracy: | | +0/33 662376056 | Software Designer | \ / CAMPAIGN | ___ | | --==< ^_^ >==-- `------------.-------: X AGAINST | \e/ There is no | | http://ymorin.is-a-geek.org/ | _/*\_ | / \ HTML MAIL | v conspiracy. | `------------------------------^-------^------------------^--------------------' -- For unsubscribe information see http://sourceware.org/lists.html#faq