RE: gcc compile?

RE: gcc compile?

[Xu, Qiang (XSSC SGP)]

i found this link:
http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/view/3.3/chapter06/gcc.html 
the article says: 

Dependencies
GCC-2.95.3 needs the following to be installed:


bash: sh
binutils: ar, as, ld, nm, ranlib
diffutils: cmp
fileutils: chmod, cp, ln, ls, mkdir, mv, rm, touch
find: find
gcc: cc, cc1, collect2, cpp0, gcc
grep: egrep, grep
make: make
patch: patch
sed: sed
sh-utils: basename, dirname, echo, expr, hostname, sleep, true, uname
tar: tar
texinfo: install-info, makeinfo
textutils: cat, tail, tr


so it seems to compile gcc2.95.3, the installation of previous version is
necessary, right?

i got a little confused. 

Regards,
Xu Qiang

Re: gcc compile?

[Joe Buck]

On Wed, Apr 23, 2003 at 09:46:00AM +0800, Xu, Qiang (XSSC SGP) wrote:
> ...
> so it seems to compile gcc2.95.3, the installation of previous version is
> necessary, right?

Yes, the C compiler is written in C, so you need an existing C compiler to
build it.

RE: gcc compile?

[Xu, Qiang (XSSC SGP)]

hi, Zack: 

you mean gcc 2.95.3 is supposed to be compiled without the existence of any
previous version of gcc? But for most solaris system, it can't actually,
because the defect in the binded cc compiler to these systems? you mean
actually, we need to "pkgadd" the binary directly in solaris systems? 

i won't install it now, for it has been "pkgadd"ed to my system already. i
am just curious about this problem. 

thanks, 

Regards,
Xu Qiang


-----Original Message-----
From: Zack Weinberg [mailto:zack@codesourcery.com]
Sent: Tuesday, April 22, 2003 10:19 AM
To: Xu, Qiang (XSSC SGP)
Cc: gcc@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: Re: gcc compile?


"Xu, Qiang (XSSC SGP)" <Xu.Qiang@xssc.sgp.xerox.com> writes:

> hi, all: 
> i have downloaded the full package of gcc 2.95.3, if i want to install it
by
> the method of "make" and "make install", is any previous gcc version
before
> 2.95.3 is required? 
...
> is there any stand-alone version of gcc? (stand-alone here means if there
is
> only the inborn cc compiler with a UNIX system, and this UNIX system
hasn't
> installed any version of gcc before, can i compile gcc2.95.3 on it?)

All released versions of GCC are intended to be stand-alone, in the
sense you are using (with the unfortunate exception of the Ada front
end).  However, there are a number of problems that can arise, most
common is that the 'inborn cc compiler' doesn't actually work at all
(this is the case on most Solaris systems, for instance).

If you would care to be more specific about what sort of Unix system
you have, and the nature of its bundled compiler, we can be more
helpful.

zw

Re: gcc compile?

[Zack Weinberg]

"Xu, Qiang (XSSC SGP)" <Xu.Qiang@xssc.sgp.xerox.com> writes:

> hi, Zack: 
>
> you mean gcc 2.95.3 is supposed to be compiled without the existence of any
> previous version of gcc?

This is supposed to be possible, yes.

> But for most solaris system, it can't actually, because the defect
> in the binded cc compiler to these systems? you mean actually, we
> need to "pkgadd" the binary directly in solaris systems?

Yes or no, depending on what you mean by 'the binary'.

If I remember correctly, the package containing the Solaris compiler
that works is called SUNWspro, and you have to pay extra money for it.

The base Solaris system includes a binary named /usr/ucb/cc which just
prints "language optional software package not installed" or words to
that effect, unless SUNWspro is installed.  Even if you do have
SUNWspro installed, you must not use /usr/ucb/cc to build GCC, because
it links against a horrifically broken BSD emulation library.
Building GCC with /opt/SUNWspro/bin/cc, however, does work.

zw

Re: gcc compile?

[Phil Edwards]

On Mon, Apr 21, 2003 at 07:41:23PM -0700, Zack Weinberg wrote:
> "Xu, Qiang (XSSC SGP)" <Xu.Qiang@xssc.sgp.xerox.com> writes:
> 
> > But for most solaris system, it can't actually, because the defect
> > in the binded cc compiler to these systems? you mean actually, we
> > need to "pkgadd" the binary directly in solaris systems?
> 
> Yes or no, depending on what you mean by 'the binary'.
> 
> If I remember correctly, the package containing the Solaris compiler
> that works is called SUNWspro, and you have to pay extra money for it.

This is correct.

> The base Solaris system includes a binary named /usr/ucb/cc which just
> prints "language optional software package not installed" or words to
> that effect, unless SUNWspro is installed.  Even if you do have
> SUNWspro installed, you must not use /usr/ucb/cc to build GCC, because
> it links against a horrifically broken BSD emulation library.
> Building GCC with /opt/SUNWspro/bin/cc, however, does work.

Another option is to install (even temporarily) a prebuilt "pkg" for gcc,
such as www.sunfreeware.com.  Be advised that the GCC developers do not
provide support for prebuilt binaries; sunfreeware.com is nevertheless a
reputable site.


Phil

-- 
If ye love wealth greater than liberty, the tranquility of servitude greater
than the animating contest for freedom, go home and leave us in peace.  We seek
not your counsel, nor your arms.  Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you;
and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen.            - Samuel Adams

gcc compile?

[Xu, Qiang (XSSC SGP)]

hi, all: 
i have downloaded the full package of gcc 2.95.3, if i want to install it by
the method of "make" and "make install", is any previous gcc version before
2.95.3 is required? 
and which version is the minimal requirement to compile v2.95.3? 

and to compile this previous version, is any version before it is a
requirement? 

if yes, it seems an endless chain. 

is there any stand-alone version of gcc? (stand-alone here means if there is
only the inborn cc compiler with a UNIX system, and this UNIX system hasn't
installed any version of gcc before, can i compile gcc2.95.3 on it?)

i checked the installation notes in the gcc 2.95.3 package, but it didn't
talk of the minimal requirements. 

any idea?

thanks, 

Regards,
Xu Qiang

Re: gcc compile?

[Zack Weinberg]

"Xu, Qiang (XSSC SGP)" <Xu.Qiang@xssc.sgp.xerox.com> writes:

> hi, all: 
> i have downloaded the full package of gcc 2.95.3, if i want to install it by
> the method of "make" and "make install", is any previous gcc version before
> 2.95.3 is required? 
...
> is there any stand-alone version of gcc? (stand-alone here means if there is
> only the inborn cc compiler with a UNIX system, and this UNIX system hasn't
> installed any version of gcc before, can i compile gcc2.95.3 on it?)

All released versions of GCC are intended to be stand-alone, in the
sense you are using (with the unfortunate exception of the Ada front
end).  However, there are a number of problems that can arise, most
common is that the 'inborn cc compiler' doesn't actually work at all
(this is the case on most Solaris systems, for instance).

If you would care to be more specific about what sort of Unix system
you have, and the nature of its bundled compiler, we can be more
helpful.

zw