Re: GCC support libraries and sysroot

[Michael Hope <michael.hope@linaro.org>]

On 16 July 2012 04:40, Maurizio Vitale <mrz.vtl@gmail.com> wrote:
> Michael Hope <michael.hope <at> linaro.org> writes:
>
>>
>> Hi there.  Why does crosstool-NG create a symlink from
>> $tuple/$sysroot/lib to $tuple/lib?  It causes GCC to install support
>> libraries like libgcc_s.so into the sysroot instead of the default
>> location which makes it tricky to replace the sysroot later.
>>
>> For our binary builds we plan to supply a few different sysroots
>> including a minimal libc, developer image with GTK and X, and a
>> desktop image with a wide range of packages.  They'll come as tarballs
>> and the intent is for people to delete the old $tuple/$sysroot and
>> extract the new one in its place.  Currently this means that the
>> support libraries will also get deleted.  The target comes with these
>> libraries preinstalled.
>>
>
> I'm exploring similar sysroot setups (but in my case I want the sysroot to work
> for both gcc and clang). Other than size, what would go wrong with having all
> sysroots including the GCC's support libraries and whatever additional library
> the specific sysroot introduces?
> Obviously it would require redistribution of all sysroot tarfiles whenever the
> compiler toolchain changes, but other than that and size, I don't see problems.
> I've just started with this setup, so I might be missing the obvious.

Hi Maurizio.  We release monthly so the cost would be unfortunate.

-- Michael

--
For unsubscribe information see http://sourceware.org/lists.html#faq