This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the binutils project.
Re: $(build_tooldir)/lib (was Re: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2000-05/msg01104.html)
- To: Geoff Keating <geoffk at cygnus dot com>
- Subject: Re: $(build_tooldir)/lib (was Re: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2000-05/msg01104.html)
- From: Jim Wilson <wilson at cygnus dot com>
- Date: Fri, 21 Jul 2000 11:54:04 -0700
- cc: hjl at lucon dot org, jason at redhat dot com, wilson at cygnus dot com, aoliva at cygnus dot com, gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org, binutils at sourceware dot cygnus dot com
There are certainly differences in the build process. HJ doesn't like to use
the --with-headers= and --with-libs= options that we recommend. I believe he
prefers to build gcc and glibc at the same time, kind of like we do with
newlib, but a lot more complicated.
If we are to make any progress on this, H.J. has to document his build process
sufficiently for others to reproduce it. The last time I asked this question,
H.J. reported what gcc configure command he was using, but didn't explain
where binutils came from, or where glibc came from. I haven't tried using
his gcc configure command, but perhaps there was enough info there if someone
has time to try it. See
I suspect that the real problem might be at configuration time. HJ tends to
use a lot of configure options that we don't use. HJ uses --enable-shared a
lot more often than we do. Perhaps he built and installed a shared library in
$tooldir/lib and needs a -B option pointing there so that the shared library
will be found?