This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: Why is building a cross compiler "out-of-the-box" always broken?
- From: René Rebe <rene at exactcode dot de>
- To: gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Cc: Ian Lance Taylor <iant at google dot com>, "Stephen M. Kenton" <skenton at ou dot edu>
- Date: Sat, 18 Aug 2007 12:50:35 +0200
- Subject: Re: Why is building a cross compiler "out-of-the-box" always broken?
- References: <46C603EC.4070004@ou.edu> <m3ir7dkepd.fsf@localhost.localdomain>
On Friday 17 August 2007 23:56:30 Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
> "Stephen M. Kenton" <skenton@ou.edu> writes:
>
> > However, the question
> > remains, why is the problem still there to be circumvented? Is there
> > some secret opposition to easy use of these tools, is there some law
> > of nature that prevents them from building, is there some good
> > technical reason that is hard to implement, or has it just not been a
> > big enough pain for anyone to beat it into submission?
>
> The central problem is that gcc, binutils, glibc, and the kernel are
> all separate projects which are distributed and maintained separately
> by different people. Thus there are mismatches and confusions and
> difficulties which result from the different release cycles and
> different agendas.
>
> Thus there is a place in the ecosystem for people to write the scripts
> needed to smooth over those differences. And indeed that ecosystem is
> filled by tools like crosstool and buildtool.
Or the T2 SDE (http://www.t2-project.org).
> This is certainly not ideal. But the organizational differences make
> it quite difficult to fix in any other way.
>
> Ian
--
René Rebe - ExactCODE GmbH - Europe, Germany, Berlin
http://exactcode.de | http://t2-project.org | http://rene.rebe.name