This is the mail archive of the crossgcc@sources.redhat.com mailing list for the crossgcc project.
See the CrossGCC FAQ for lots more information.
| Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
|---|---|---|
| Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |
| Other format: | [Raw text] | |
On Mon, Sep 13, 2004 at 09:55:33AM -0700, Daniel Kegel wrote:
> > > Did you also look at http://kegel.com/crosstool? Ryan is contributing
> > > improvements to those, too. (He wanted NPTL support, and sent in a patch.
> > > I'll try to add that in the next release.)
> >
> > Yes, but I faced some problems when trying to use a custom versions
> > combo (I'm using a pretty exotic one at the moment)
>
> Can you tell me more?
Sorry, I'm afraid that "problems" was misleading. It was just a matter of
personal tastes. Since the beginning I was looking for something I could
have easily wrote some CRUX Pgkfile scripts from.
From this point of view, after I gave a look at both crosstool and cross-lfs,
I found myself more comfortable with cross-lfs. Less patches to apply
(actually I hadn't to patch anything at all) and few, standard scripts to
follow.
Furthermore, the CRUX PPC regular toolchain building scripts have a lot in
common with LFS so I kinda "felt at home". That's all. =)
> > Is there a way to make it to coexist with the "regular" toolchain in
> > /usr?
>
> Maybe, but it's a lot safer to put it somewhere else.
>
>
> > > I think the 2nd gcc can completely replace the 1st.
> >
> > Do you think is possible to safely mix libgcc_eh.a and libgcc_s.so*
> > from the second gcc with the files from the first one?
>
> I don't know. I would suggest just using the files
> installed by the 2nd one and ignoring all the files from the 1st.
I removed the previous glibc and gcc packages and kept just the last ones and
all went fine.
I took /usr/${TARGET}/ as default location, I hope it will be ok.
Thanks a lot for the info.
> > I'm trying to do so because CRUX generally tries to make different
> > packages for each single components.
>
> Yeah, but that doesn't make sense for cross-compiler toolchains,
> I've come to believe. You'll be much happier if you make
> the whole toolchain a package.
I know but that was one of my goal since the beginning. That's why I asked.
Scuse me for the late reply.
Thanks again.
Best regards.
--
Value your freedom, or you will lose it, teaches history.
``Don't bother us with politics,'' respond those who don't
want to learn.
-- Richard M. Stallman
http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/linux-gnu-freedom.html
Attachment:
pgp00000.pgp
Description: PGP signature
| Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
|---|---|---|
| Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |