This is the mail archive of the
gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: Standardized instructions for cross-compiling toolchain?
- From: Michael Habibi <mikehabibi at gmail dot com>
- To: Andrew Haley <aph at redhat dot com>
- Cc: gcc-help at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: Wed, 4 May 2016 12:51:18 -0500
- Subject: Re: Standardized instructions for cross-compiling toolchain?
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <CAOsp8o-fVfAjgez9ttRw0+ckm+MKOomAXnwURcGmCV+AsMX=oA at mail dot gmail dot com> <572A2247 dot 2020003 at redhat dot com> <CAOsp8o-qYO95SGj+mNsqVhak8gU4ECo8UMhByd+fyeN+iGJrJw at mail dot gmail dot com> <572A2747 dot 7020105 at redhat dot com> <CAOsp8o8rFi88Azs5QOUe-1KvjB0xrjfGYHf5T6Z09-0riQdPNg at mail dot gmail dot com> <572A3403 dot 4070502 at redhat dot com> <CAOsp8o9CvvLYJ4mtYxtQzLbzyPEd1gGpSjuy3in8vWE67k45tw at mail dot gmail dot com> <572A3654 dot 6070603 at redhat dot com>
I follow what you're saying now. Thanks!
On Wed, May 4, 2016 at 12:50 PM, Andrew Haley <aph@redhat.com> wrote:
> On 05/04/2016 06:46 PM, Michael Habibi wrote:
>> I think the reason we went with crosstool-ng in the past is that we
>> are using a custom built distribution based on a vanilla kernel and
>> some various open source/IP added on top. Over time, we have needed to
>> upgrade gcc/glibc to pick up changes/CVEs, etc. Given that, I don't
>> think we can simply leverage the target files of another available
>> distribution and expect it to plug into ours cleanly for the purposes
>> of rebuilding gcc.
>
> Sure, but it gets you a working compiler to begin with without you
> having to build your own libc first, even if it's the "wrong" distro.
> When you have the "right" distro you can build it again. This is,
> more or less, what crosstool does.
>
> Each to their own.
>
> Andrew.
>