From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 22717 invoked by alias); 13 May 2003 20:34:45 -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 22653 invoked from network); 13 May 2003 20:34:45 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO shell4.bayarea.net) (209.128.82.1) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 13 May 2003 20:34:45 -0000 Received: from eagercon.com (209-128-106-254.bayarea.net [209.128.106.254]) by shell4.bayarea.net (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h4DKYdB08475; Tue, 13 May 2003 13:34:39 -0700 Message-ID: <3EC156DF.2020201@eagercon.com> Date: Tue, 13 May 2003 20:34:00 -0000 From: Michael Eager User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.4a) Gecko/20030401 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Rene Rebe CC: pkoning@equallogic.com, drow@mvista.com, gcc@gcc.gnu.org, rock-linux@rocklinux.org Subject: Re: building a gcc-3.3-prerelease cross-compiler References: <3EC11365.7020707@eagercon.com> <20030513.181007.149799615.rene.rebe@gmx.net> <3EC13D95.6080108@eagercon.com> <20030513.214707.412778972.rene.rebe@gmx.net> In-Reply-To: <20030513.214707.412778972.rene.rebe@gmx.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2003-05/txt/msg01357.txt.bz2 Rene Rebe wrote: >> (1) how do you create that version of gcc, and (2) is >>this the same version of gcc that you build later? >> This is the classic bootstrap >>problem which appears overlooked. > > > Could you elaborate on the problem that appears to be overlooked? I occasionally have a need to build a toolchain for a new architecture or new variant. After building binutils, the first step is to build a bootstrap compiler. Once I have that compiler, I can build glibc. After building glibc, I build a complete gcc. Both versions of gcc, the bootstrap and the final, are built from the same sources. In your scheme, you assume that the bootstrap has been done. Also the compiler you use to build glibc is potentially one revision back from your final compiler. When you are working with one architecture, and repeatedly building for that architecture, then this not a problem. But if you are building tools for different architectures, or a new architecture, or you want to make the entire process explicit, the bootstrap process should be explicit. -- Michael Eager Eager Consulting eager@eagercon.com 1960 Park Blvd., Palo Alto, CA 94306 650-325-8077