From: gemesys@idirect.com
To: gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org
Cc: gemesys@idirect.com
Subject: GCC build from source. Where does a build of GCC, put the "gcc" executable???
Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2024 18:31:38 -0500 (EST) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <564fd9196fb695e046c448024ac5f10c@webmail.look.ca> (raw)
Hi;
For various reasons, I needed to build a GCC 4.8.5 compiler
from the source tarball. I did this, using gcc version 4.3 and
looks like it worked.
(any one reading, can jump to TL;DR at end...)
Before I run "make install", I just want to run the just-made
"gcc" executable file, with "./gcc --version" just to confirm
the darn thing actually got built successfully and might
actually work.
I built in the "gcc-4.8.5" source directory. Why? Because this
worked on two other vintage 32-bit machines. The build has
completed - I have several "xxx-i686-pc-linux-gnu" directories,
and numerous object library directories, and several sub-dirs
called "gcc" - some of which have .c code, and some of which
contain object files - but none of these actually have THE NEEDED
GCC EXECUTABLE FILE! This is hilarious. Doing this exercise is
like an old game of "Dungeons and Dragons" ("You are in a dark place,
with many dark, twisty dimly-lit possible passages...")
I have read the documenation on BUilding GCC from Source, and that
is how I got it all to work.
Now - please: Where oh where does this GCC build put the gosh-darn
"gcc" program and the other related executable files? (g++, F95, etc.)
In /home/gcc/gcc-4.8.5/host-i686-pc-linux-gnu/gcc I have F951, and
files which appears to runable, and I have two
things called: "xgcc" and "xg++" which maybe are gcc and g++ after
the "make install" is run?
I had to build with the curious triple-check bootstrap thing
disabled, since I was running out of disk space (also hilarious).
But the "make -disable-bootstrap" ran successfully to completion.
I just want to inspect the built "gcc" program, confirm it is
the correct new one, and actually works, before I run the
"make install" to fling everything into "/usr/local...", as
per CentOS/Fedora/Redhat style Linux.
So - what is the secret? Does "xgcc" and "xg++" magically
turn into "gcc" and "g++" and find their way into /usr/local/bin
(as per Redhat Linux typical installs)?
Does "GCC Build from Source" not actually create a "gcc"?
I suspect this is the simple answer - but after a
silly amount of google-time-waste and read/read/read of
documents - I remain in the dark. :(
- Mark Langdon,
Proprietor,
Lorcalon Farm (where we BUILD our own TOOLS!) and
Owner, GEMESYS Ltd.
PS and
TL;DR
(After more detailed examination of things, I am guessing
that it is the "make install" step that creates the "gcc"
in /usr/local/bin. Is that correct?)
Thanx for any info, anyone might want to fling my way!
-M
next reply other threads:[~2024-02-21 0:15 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-02-20 23:31 gemesys [this message]
2024-02-21 0:20 ` Jonathan Wakely
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=564fd9196fb695e046c448024ac5f10c@webmail.look.ca \
--to=gemesys@idirect.com \
--cc=gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).