This is the mail archive of the
gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: bootstrap/8657: No rule to make target `bootstrap' in directory'gcc'
- From: Zack Weinberg <zack at codesourcery dot com>
- To: Neil Booth <neil at daikokuya dot co dot uk>
- Cc: reichelt at igpm dot rwth-aachen dot de, gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org, gcc-prs at gcc dot gnu dot org, nobody at gcc dot gnu dot org, rolf-alois dot walter at db dot com, gcc-gnats at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: Wed, 20 Nov 2002 13:46:26 -0800
- Subject: Re: bootstrap/8657: No rule to make target `bootstrap' in directory'gcc'
- References: <20021120150358.30103.qmail@sources.redhat.com><20021120192431.GB19591@daikokuya.co.uk>
Neil Booth <neil@daikokuya.co.uk> writes:
>>
>> First, we highly recommend that GCC be built into a separate
>> directory than the sources which does not reside within the
>> source tree. This is how we generally build GCC; building where
>> srcdir == objdir should still work, but doesn't get extensive
>> testing; building where objdir is a subdirectory of srcdir is
>> unsupported.
>
> This latter "unsupported" configuration is what (at least) me and
> Jakub build on, and it has *always* worked. Maybe the docs should
> be updated.
In my experience, if objdir is a subdirectory of srcdir AND configure
is invoked by a relative pathname, it doesn't work. But if configure
is invoked by an absolute pathname, objdir can happily be a
subdirectory of srcdir; and if objdir is not a subdirectory of srcdir,
relative paths work fine.
I don't remember the exact failure mode, but it was clearly a case of
some shell script fragment somewhere getting mixed up about how many
../ components it needed to put in a pathname.
zw