From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 18133 invoked by alias); 28 Feb 2002 23:16:49 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 18040 invoked from network); 28 Feb 2002 23:16:45 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO potter.sfbay.redhat.com) (209.249.29.60) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 28 Feb 2002 23:16:45 -0000 Received: from dot.sfbay.redhat.com (dot.sfbay.redhat.com [205.180.230.224]) by potter.sfbay.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id g1SNBWh05194; Thu, 28 Feb 2002 15:11:32 -0800 Received: (from rth@localhost) by dot.sfbay.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) id g1SNGg930564; Thu, 28 Feb 2002 15:16:42 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: dot.sfbay.redhat.com: rth set sender to rth@redhat.com using -f Date: Thu, 28 Feb 2002 16:32:00 -0000 From: Richard Henderson To: Alexandre Oliva Cc: mike stump , mark@codesourcery.com, per@bothner.com, gcc@gcc.gnu.org Subject: Re: Installation proposal Message-ID: <20020228151642.A30561@redhat.com> Mail-Followup-To: Richard Henderson , Alexandre Oliva , mike stump , mark@codesourcery.com, per@bothner.com, gcc@gcc.gnu.org References: <200202281940.LAA03761@kankakee.wrs.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5.1i In-Reply-To: ; from aoliva@redhat.com on Thu, Feb 28, 2002 at 06:43:58PM -0300 X-SW-Source: 2002-02/txt/msg01852.txt.bz2 On Thu, Feb 28, 2002 at 06:43:58PM -0300, Alexandre Oliva wrote: > Perhaps this is just the right time to move the whole bootstrap > procedure out of gcc to the top level? Then, we'd not only have > separate pseudo-install trees for each stage, but also we'd get the > added benefit of having the complete toolchain built (and optimized) > by the toolchain itself. That does indeed sound ideal. r~