This is the mail archive of the
gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
[Bug bootstrap/21698] creating first stage compiler
- From: "jlm_devel at laposte dot net" <gcc-bugzilla at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- To: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: 21 May 2005 17:50:48 -0000
- Subject: [Bug bootstrap/21698] creating first stage compiler
- References: <20050521154049.21698.jlm_devel@laposte.net>
- Reply-to: gcc-bugzilla at gcc dot gnu dot org
------- Additional Comments From jlm_devel at laposte dot net 2005-05-21 17:50 -------
maybe, I can too using several workaround like crosstool.sh is doing.... but
this lead to have the target tree be located at the same place of the
crosschain.... which is a nonsens...
why a target filesystem's location MUST depend on where the chain is located?
anyway the issue is related to gcc/libgcc.mk
seeking into the logs I found that make gcc-all was doing a
make \
CFLAGS="-mtune=athlon64 -O2 -pipe -Wno-deprecated-declarations -W -Wall
-Wwrite-strings -Wstrict-prototypes -Wmissing-prototypes -pedantic
-Wno-long-long " \
CONFIG_H="config.h auto-host.h ./../include/ansidecl.h" \
MAKEOVERRIDES= \
-f libgcc.mk all
which fail....
on the other hand when doing a make all in gcc/ you still get the right libgcc.a
so i'll make a patch....
anyway since you're using gnu make why are the Makefiles such a mess (lot of
redefines, no use of include....)
so I still maintain that the --with-local-prefix= in configure should be used to
give information where the headers are located (all the docs I read say so....)
and that there is an issue with libgcc.mk
as you say peoples are doing crosscompiler everyday but look at crosstool.sh 's
hacks to be sure there are a issue....
by the way : should the gcc libraries not be independant of a libc?
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21698