This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: Status and rationale for toplevel bootstrap (was Re: Example of debugging GCC with toplevel bootstrap)
- From: Arnaud Charlet <charlet at adacore dot com>
- To: Bonzini Paolo <paolo dot bonzini at lu dot unisi dot ch>
- Cc: gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org, jason at redhat dot com, ebotcazou at libertysurf dot fr, kenner at vlsi1 dot ultra dot nyu dot edu
- Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2006 10:30:55 +0100
- Subject: Re: Status and rationale for toplevel bootstrap (was Re: Example of debugging GCC with toplevel bootstrap)
- References: <5DAF847A2991A941AAF96F8E7261E0A9318088@usi05.usilu.net>
> Fourth, because toplevel bootstrap is a prerequisite for many further
> cleanups and improvements, including moving libgcc to the toplevel and
> bootstrapping libada.
For my information, what point is there in boostrapping libada ?
BTW, it seems that ADAFLAGS (and BOOT_ADAFLAGS) are no longer passed
properly with the current makefiles, e.g:
make BOOT_ADAFLAGS="-gnatpg" \
STAGE1_CFLAGS="-O0 -g" bootstrap
will build the compiler with -gnata, which is incorrect.
(I used configure --disable-libada is that makes a difference).