Building gcc

[Frank Schafer]

Curtis R Anderson wrote:

> Frank Schafer wrote:
> >
> > Hi there,
> >
> > I'm building a complete GNU/Linux system from scratch. The first turn,
> > building everything needed statically linked went fine. Now I'll need to
> > make the static build.
> >
> > During the static build there were already several include files
> > installed. The glibc docs say to remove everything in ``/usr/include''.
> > Can I remove this ( or better initialize it containing only the kernel
> > headers ) before the build, if everything is static?
>
> I did this some time ago, and recalled that I followed the instructions
> presented in the "Linux From Scratch" guide. Whatever they had worked
> quite well.
>
> > Oh, before I forget ... will I be able to build everything with 3.0.x?
> > It is reported, that ( at least glibc ) things cannot be built with it.
> > I got a reply, that there is a patch for 2.95.3 to proper compile glibc,
> > but nobody can tell me WHERE it is.
>
> It probably would be best to keep older compilers around like 2.95.3 for
> the kernel and libraries. 2.95.2 probably will work out, although egcs
> 2.91 or whatever would be best for the kernel.
> --
> Curtis R. Anderson, Co-creator of "Gleepy the Hen", SP 2.5?, KoX
> No digital wireless, no xDSL, no pagers. Keeps the riff-raff out.
> http://www.madbbs.com/users/gleepy/    ICQ: 50137888
> mailto:gleepy@intelligencia.com        UTM: PS 7036 7315, zone 17

Thanks. Meanwhile I've realized, that the gcc 3-series can't be used for
glibc. Even gcc2.95.3 needs a patch to build properly. I've found this patch
in the source trees of several distributors. It's also on
ftp.linuxfromscratch.org.
I don't want to have different compilers. Many advise ( and I agree ), that
everything should be compiled with ONE compiler.
So I'll stuck with the patched gcc-2.95.3.
It's not so fine, that the gcc people and the glibc people don't synchronize
their work -- but what can we do with this??

Regards
Frank