This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: Proposed minor build-process revamp to simplify cross-configuration
- To: gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Subject: Re: Proposed minor build-process revamp to simplify cross-configuration
- From: "H . J . Lu" <hjl at lucon dot org>
- Date: Sat, 13 May 2000 10:13:33 -0700
- Cc: rittle at rsch dot comm dot mot dot com, libstdc++ at sourceware dot cygnus dot com
- References: <200005120942.EAA16497@latour.rsch.comm.mot.com> <6487.958236609@upchuck>
On Sat, May 13, 2000 at 10:50:09AM -0600, Jeffrey A Law wrote:
> In message <200005120942.EAA16497@latour.rsch.comm.mot.com>you write:
> > Now, it is interesting to note that 'gcc -Bpath/' alone does almost
> > precisely what we want in order to test the tree before we install
> > into the final location, if and only if, we force all packages being
> > built with gcc to offer some sort of pre-install of headers (and maybe
> > libraries) into a tree structure that mirrors the final tree structure
> > but held within $(obj). We don't do that today.
> [ ... ]
> This is not unlike what Joel & others have proposed for newlib since we
> have precisely the same problems there (and some you don't have with
> libstdc++ :-)
>
> I think that a make target for installing headers into a well known location
> in the build tree which mirrors the structure of the installed tree would
> simplify a number of issues.
I have put my patches for gcc 2.95 at
http://www.lucon.org/gcc/2.95/
They may be needed to do parallel build on SMP machine and cross
compile. BTW, I have to apply some of them to make the Linux/ia64
cross compiler on Linux/ia32. Pick ones you like and ignore others.
H.J.