Re: Offloading compilers' support libraries

[Thomas Schwinge <thomas at codesourcery dot com>]

Hi!

On Thu, 19 Feb 2015 13:08:20 +0100, Bernd Schmidt <bernds@codesourcery.com> wrote:
> On 02/19/2015 12:42 PM, Thomas Schwinge wrote:
> > This specific buglet aside (that the handling of intelmic and nvptx
> > offloading is inconsistent) -- will we have to add such handling to each
> > and every library that is built for the offloading compilers?  (Including
> > libraries that aren't part of the GCC sources, but may be built as part
> > of GCC's build process, such as when newlib is linked into [GCC]/newlib?)
> 
> No, they go into different directories. Only libgcc.a (along with a very 
> few other pieces) is installed under lib/gcc/...

Thanks, I see.

> > Then, why does this only apply to libsubdir?  What about header files,
> > documentation files, and so on?  (If they aren't expected to differ
> > between the target and offloading compilers, I think it's still not a
> > good idea to arbitrarely have them be overwritten by on respective build
> > tree's make install process.)  Should we have a more general solution to
> > this problem?
> 
> That stuff goes into the normal lib and include directories. I'm 
> guessing a sysroot is what you want to keep it separate.

My asumption is that it is always safe to install non-native (that is
cross) GCC installations into the same prefix.  (Which would resolve this
problem of clashing file names for target and offloading compilers for
good.)

So, the next question is, instead of this special handling, why can't we
require the offloading compilers to always be configured as cross
compilers?  Or, why is it a requirement that the intelmic offloading
compiler is configured as a native compiler?


GrÃÃe,
 Thomas

Attachment: pgpIIthOj61l4.pgp
Description: PGP signature