Re: gcc_tooldir is useless

[Andreas Schwab <schwab at suse dot de>]

Jeffrey A Law <law@cygnus.com> writes:

|>   In message <je3dw8b34a.fsf@hawking.suse.de>you write:
|>   > $(gcc_tooldir) is logically the same as $(tooldir), but contains some ".."
|>   > parts that are supposed to lead relatively from $(libsubdir) to
|>   > $(exec_prefix).  This will fail if any component between $(prefix) and
|>   > $(libsubdir) does not exist or is a symlink to some unrelated directory.
|> Right.   But we're going to have to live with it long term.
|> 
|> It's 100%, totally stupid for people to have to recompile the tools because
|> they moved them around.  The tools need to "just work" when people move
|> the directory tree around.

I don't understand this.  $(prefix) is hardcoded, the relative distance
between $(libsubdir) and $(tooldir) is hardcoded, so where is the
advantage, especially if building a cross compiler simply does not work?
Does the GCC team consider the case of building a cross compile as
unimportant?  That would be bad, IMHO.

Andreas.

-- 
Andreas Schwab                                  "And now for something
schwab@suse.de                                   completely different."
SuSE GmbH, Schanzäckerstr. 10, D-90443 Nürnberg