This is the mail archive of the gcc@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GCC project.

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format:	[Raw text]

Re: make all vs make bootstrap

From: Ben Elliston <bje at au1 dot ibm dot com>
To: Paolo Bonzini <paolo dot bonzini at lu dot unisi dot ch>
Cc: GCC Development <gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org>, Andrew Pinski <pinskia at physics dot uc dot edu>, Giovanni Bajo <rasky at develer dot com>, Daniel Berlin <dberlin at dberlin dot org>
Date: Tue, 20 Dec 2005 14:39:37 +1100
Subject: Re: make all vs make bootstrap
References: <55ddb41ef34f60aa639bf11fe70fbf66@physics.uc.edu> <022901c601a1$a0e1e8c0$bf03030a@trilan> <1134670680.7414.2.camel@linux.site> <43A280E4.2010108@lu.unisi.ch>

Hi Paolo

> It supports all the bells and whistles like bubblestraps and
> restageN, which help during development. make restrap (taking a
> non-bootstrap build and using it as stage1) is not supported. make
> restageN is called make all-stageN, and there is also make
> all-stageN-gcc to rebuild gcc only. There is no equivalent to
> quickstrap, even though it can be added if there's demand.

I see that gcc/doc/makefile.texi is now out of date.  Can you update
it so that we have a reference for the new targets?  Thanks,

Ben

References:
- make all vs make bootstrap
  - From: Andrew Pinski
- Re: make all vs make bootstrap
  - From: Giovanni Bajo
- Re: make all vs make bootstrap
  - From: Daniel Berlin
- Re: make all vs make bootstrap
  - From: Paolo Bonzini

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]