This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: Status and rationale for toplevel bootstrap (was Re: Example of debugging GCC with toplevel bootstrap)
- From: Eric Botcazou <ebotcazou at libertysurf dot fr>
- To: "Bonzini Paolo" <paolo dot bonzini at lu dot unisi dot ch>
- Cc: gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org, jason at redhat dot com, kenner at vlsi1 dot ultra dot nyu dot edu
- Date: Sat, 14 Jan 2006 14:43:28 +0100
- Subject: Re: Status and rationale for toplevel bootstrap (was Re: Example of debugging GCC with toplevel bootstrap)
- References: <5DAF847A2991A941AAF96F8E7261E0A9318088@usi05.usilu.net>
> So the previous system was easy? IMO it's just that it's been tested for
> 15 years. Personally it took me a lot of time to understand the working of
> bubblestrap, stage*_copy, stage*_build, and so on
The previous "make" was easy. Now even "make" is too much intricate for
common mortals.
> The point is that you have to decide in advance if the toplevel will
> bootstrap. If you use --disable-bootstrap, it will not.
I know, I exclusively use that nowadays. :-)
> --disable-bootstrap will *not* disappear;rather, "../configure
> --disable-bootstrap && make bootstrap", which currently triggers the
> old-style GCC-only bootstrap, will disappear.
That's good news and actually sufficient to allay most of my concerns. And
you can count on me to yell if --disable-bootstrap breaks. :-)
--
Eric Botcazou