This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: cross-compilation documentation
Peter Barada wrote:
But this fragment *requires* a cross-compiler to build it.
Hmm. That's odd. I do almost the same thing, but I don't require a cross-compiler.
Maybe the step you're missing is the following kludge:
make sysdeps/gnu/errlist.c
mkdir -p stdio-common
touch stdio-common/errlist-compat.c
That goes between the configure and the make of glibc, and keeps anything
real from being compiled by the install-headers.
If that's in the source tree then its *really* a kludge and won't work
too well for me since I keep my source in a CVS controlled tree.
Well, yes, it is *really* a kludge. The cleaner way to approach
that would be a patch the glibc's makefile to prevent the
install-headers step from generating any .c files, by breaking
that out into an install-generated-sources step, maybe.
I think the powers that be are suggesting that the fix for gcc-3.5
might be to separate out the building of libgcc from the building of
gcc. Hmm, and then separate out the building of anything in glibc
that requires libgcc into a separate target. Then we could do
make bootstrap gcc without libgcc
make whatever parts of glibc that don't depend on libgcc
make real gcc including libgcc
make whatever parts of glibc that depend on libgcc
That's what I described as *two* bootstrap compilers and *two*
configure/builds of glibc...
No, it's a bit different. When they do this for 3.5, it'll
be done cleanly, so you're really only building any particular
part once (except for the bootstrap gcc, which is a duplication
of the final gcc).
- Dan
--
Dan Kegel
http://www.kegel.com
http://counter.li.org/cgi-bin/runscript/display-person.cgi?user=78045