This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: LANGUAGES vs --enable-languages (was: Testsuite documentation)
- To: Tim Prince <tprince at computer dot org>
- Subject: Re: LANGUAGES vs --enable-languages (was: Testsuite documentation)
- From: "David O'Brien" <obrien at FreeBSD dot org>
- Date: Mon, 4 Dec 2000 17:53:34 -0800
- Cc: gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Organization: The NUXI BSD group
- References: <001a01c058eb$6e346420$9865fea9@timayum4srqln4> <Pine.BSF.4.30.0011280952040.8748-100000@deneb.dbai.tuwien.ac.at> <20001204145239.B11541@relay.nuxi.com> <004d01c05e5c$ae80e960$9865fea9@intel9txl52pzr>
- Reply-To: obrien at FreeBSD dot org
On Mon, Dec 04, 2000 at 05:42:47PM -0800, Tim Prince wrote:
> C is implied; it is built with any combination of languages specified,
> or none, or with LANGUAGES=C.
Yes I know C is implied. You really didn't answer the question.
From http://gcc.gnu.org/install/configure.html, one sees:
If you do not pass this flag, all languages available in the gcc
sub-tree will be configured. Re-defining LANGUAGES when calling make
bootstrap *does not* work anymore those language sub-directories
might not have been configured!
So given a checked out egcs/ tree, how to build only the C compiler?
--enable-languages="" didn't work last time I tried it[*]. Nor was
--enable-languages="c" supported.
[*] I'd re-check, but the tree isn't bootstrap'able for me right now.
--
-- David (obrien@FreeBSD.org)