Re: Compiling w/o gcc?

["David A. Greene" <greened at eecs dot umich dot edu>]

Benjamin Kosnik wrote:

> Hmm. A place to start is to take the current CVS for libstdc++-v3, and
> try to compile all the source files on your target platform with your
> vendor compiler. You can find a list of these sources in the assorted
> Makefiles (libsupc++/Makefile.am and src/Makefile.am in particular.)

Ok, I can certainly do that, but it doesn't really make any sense
to me.  I have Makefiles.  Why don't those work.

I guess I'm getting hung up on the fact that this is a _library_.
Why is it so difficult to compile just the library bits?

> I don't know if anybody's done this before, which would explain why
> the HOWTOs are a bit weak on the subject.

Fair enough.

> You could look at the Makefiles generated for a native linux/x86 build
> and port that to your host system. You could try building a cross
> compiler and using those configuration files for your system. I leave
> the final approach as an exercise.... 

I mentioned before that building a cross compiler is not (yet) possible.
We've got another team that's going to start a GCC targeting project,
but it's going to take a while.  Even if we do get a proper cross-gcc,
we still need to compile the library with our vendor compiler to get
the proper binary interface.

> With all due respect, I doubt you have a current runtime from your
> vendor: major changes to the GNU c++ runtime code happened just this
> wednesday.

Eh? You lost me here.  Why would I need any GNU c++ runtime code?
The vendor has provided runtime (exceptions, static initialization,
etc.) already.  Is there some specific GNU runtime needed for
libstdc++?  We have a C++ compiler.  It seems to me we ought to be
able to compile a C++ library.

Thanks again!

-Dave


-- 

"Some little people have music in them, but Fats, he was all music,
and you know how big he was."  --  James P. Johnson