From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 1508 invoked by alias); 23 Jun 2003 15:45:04 -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 23439 invoked from network); 23 Jun 2003 15:41:03 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO sccrmhc11.attbi.com) (204.127.202.55) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 23 Jun 2003 15:41:03 -0000 Received: from kegel.com (c-24-126-73-164.we.client2.attbi.com[24.126.73.164](untrusted sender)) by attbi.com (sccrmhc11) with SMTP id <20030623154102011007ih8te>; Mon, 23 Jun 2003 15:41:03 +0000 Message-ID: <3EF72210.2000106@kegel.com> Date: Mon, 23 Jun 2003 15:57:00 -0000 From: Dan Kegel User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.4) Gecko/20030529 X-Accept-Language: de-de, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Peter Barada CC: drow@mvista.com, zack@codesourcery.com, pinskia@physics.uc.edu, wilson@tuliptree.org, gcc@gcc.gnu.org Subject: Re: cross-compilation documentation References: <02F74B2F-A4D6-11D7-AD8C-000393A6D2F2@physics.uc.edu> <878yruf1pl.fsf@egil.codesourcery.com> <3EF5FACA.9020400@kegel.com> <87znkadj94.fsf@egil.codesourcery.com> <20030622193607.98A4D98DFD@baradas.org> <20030622194204.GA7163@nevyn.them.org> <20030623024805.6D3E998DFD@baradas.org> <3EF66E11.3080509@kegel.com> <20030623025952.CE49398DFD@baradas.org> <3EF67F7F.3070805@kegel.com> <20030623130734.4007D98DFD@baradas.org> In-Reply-To: <20030623130734.4007D98DFD@baradas.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2003-06/txt/msg01930.txt.bz2 Peter Barada wrote: >>>But this fragment *requires* a cross-compiler to build it. >> >>Hmm. That's odd. I do almost the same thing, but I don't require a cross-compiler. >>Maybe the step you're missing is the following kludge: >> make sysdeps/gnu/errlist.c >> mkdir -p stdio-common >> touch stdio-common/errlist-compat.c >>That goes between the configure and the make of glibc, and keeps anything >>real from being compiled by the install-headers. > > > If that's in the source tree then its *really* a kludge and won't work > too well for me since I keep my source in a CVS controlled tree. Well, yes, it is *really* a kludge. The cleaner way to approach that would be a patch the glibc's makefile to prevent the install-headers step from generating any .c files, by breaking that out into an install-generated-sources step, maybe. >>I think the powers that be are suggesting that the fix for gcc-3.5 >>might be to separate out the building of libgcc from the building of >>gcc. Hmm, and then separate out the building of anything in glibc >>that requires libgcc into a separate target. Then we could do >> make bootstrap gcc without libgcc >> make whatever parts of glibc that don't depend on libgcc >> make real gcc including libgcc >> make whatever parts of glibc that depend on libgcc > > That's what I described as *two* bootstrap compilers and *two* > configure/builds of glibc... No, it's a bit different. When they do this for 3.5, it'll be done cleanly, so you're really only building any particular part once (except for the bootstrap gcc, which is a duplication of the final gcc). - Dan -- Dan Kegel http://www.kegel.com http://counter.li.org/cgi-bin/runscript/display-person.cgi?user=78045