From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 9527 invoked by alias); 27 Nov 2013 13:58:04 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-help-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-help-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 9510 invoked by uid 89); 27 Nov 2013 13:58:04 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=1.6 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_50,RDNS_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=no version=3.3.2 X-HELO: mout.gmx.net Received: from Unknown (HELO mout.gmx.net) (212.227.17.22) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with (AES128-SHA encrypted) ESMTPS; Wed, 27 Nov 2013 13:58:03 +0000 Received: from 3capp-gmx-bs06.server.lan ([172.19.170.55]) by mrigmx.server.lan (mrigmx001) with ESMTP (Nemesis) id 0Me6KG-1W0QWq0FLC-00Pv3x for ; Wed, 27 Nov 2013 14:57:54 +0100 Received: from [37.49.95.139] by 3capp-gmx-bs06.server.lan with HTTP; Wed Nov 27 14:57:54 CET 2013 MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-ID: From: "Johannes Lorenz" To: gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org Cc: "Andrew Haley" , "Kai Ruottu" Subject: Aw: Re: How to compile gcc toolchain with special sysroot correctly? Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Date: Wed, 27 Nov 2013 15:17:00 -0000 Sensitivity: Normal X-IsSubscribed: yes X-SW-Source: 2013-11/txt/msg00218.txt.bz2 @Andrew: I copied these crt*.o libraries, but now, it complains that it is missing stdio.h. I really guess it would be better to link to the whole old glibc. Is there any good trick to tell gcc: Search in your sysroot, but if you can not find it, try in "/usr/include" ? (somehow the opposite of "-I") @Kai: > Are you trying to build the target Linux system from scratch? The > produced glibc runtime parts (shared > libs) being installed onto the originally unexisting target system? If > not then your goal is "conceptually > wrong" I don't know what you mean, but I am trying to install glibc to another "root" on the same target system. I have gcc 4.4, but want to have 4.7 (on the same target), so I tried to compile a new toolchain in ~/local, using my gcc 4.4. > In a simple Ubuntu 12.04 to OpenSuSE 12.2 cross compiler case using a > sysroot'ed glibc for the target system > one of course would produce only the target binutils and the target GCC > for the $host (that usually being a > totally different arch, different CPU, and system, for instance > Solaris2.10). Ok, I don't want to compile to a different target. I only mentioned openSuSE to say that the versions of binutils, gcc and glibc work on "some system". But I just want to compile on $host for $host ;) Both are Ubuntu. > If this isn't clear then one should ask : "Do people REALLY > replace the target C library in native > binutils and GCC builds?" It would sound "sane" to rebuild the system > glibc with the updated binutils and > GCC afterwards, they are newer and should produce a better and quicker C > library, or how? But please > believe me, the native binutils and GCC builders don't try to replace > the target C library in '/lib*', '/usr/lib*', > '/usr/include' etc. Neither all the X11 libraries in the system! So why > on earth any cross GCC builder would > do that if all the target libraries are already there, prebuilt and tested? So you'd say, unlike Andrew, that I should not compile a new glibc. I need a new libstdc++, I hope this will be compatible with the old glibc. But if I really want to compile a new glibc, you think this is impossible/very difficult? Thanks and regards, Johannes -- Diese E-Mail wurde aus dem Sicherheitsverbund E-Mail made in Germany versendet: http://www.gmx.net/e-mail-made-in-germany