This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: Installation proposal
- From: Jim Wilson <wilson at redhat dot com>
- To: Mark Mitchell <mark at codesourcery dot com>
- Cc: gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: 27 Feb 2002 11:14:11 -0800
- Subject: Re: Installation proposal
- References: <firstname.lastname@example.org>
There are 3 prefixes not 1. This scheme still needs to work even if
prefix != exec_prefix != local_prefix.
As David Edelsohn mentioned, there could be problems if you have a previous
installed tree with the same prefix. The tree being tested may accidentally
use stuff from the install tree if we aren't manually using -B/-L/-I/etc
This could cause problems with builds using combined binutils/gcc/newlib/etc
source trees. This is a common method for building embedded cross compilers.
If you build gcc into an install subdir, but don't change how binutils works,
then the install/bin/gcc won't be able to find the just built assembler and
linker, and pre-install testing will fail. The binutils problem could be fixed
by requiring people to seperately build and install binutils first, but the
libraries newlib and libgloss are trickier. You can't test gcc without the
library support (e.g. crt0.o), but you can't build the libraries until after
you have built the compiler. This is all a little easier if everything works
the same way and can be built from the same tree.