This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: Standardized instructions for cross-compiling toolchain?
- From: Andrew Haley <aph at redhat dot com>
- To: Michael Habibi <mikehabibi at gmail dot com>
- Cc: gcc-help at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: Wed, 4 May 2016 18:50:12 +0100
- 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>
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.