This is the mail archive of the crossgcc@sourceware.org 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] |
i'm curious what others think about this fairly minor proposed extension to crosstool. at the moment, based on the tooochain i'm building, this is the directory structure that would be created for me under the "results" directory: results/ gcc-4.0.1-glibc-2.3.5/ TOOLCOMBO sh3-unknown-linux-gnu/ TARGET ... the actual results ... that entire path is, in all.sh, encapsulated in the variable PREFIX: PREFIX=${PREFIX-$RESULT_TOP/$TOOLCOMBO/$TARGET} which is fine, except for a couple of issues. first, that directory structure is kind of cumbersome and, in many cases, a bit of overkill if one is only ever building a single toolchain, as i am. in addition, while the TOOLCOMBO directory name apparently is used to distiguish between toolchains built with differing versions of gcc and glibc, it can't distinguish between, say, different versions of binutils. or the linux kernel. or the sanitized headers. or perhaps different configuration options. as an alternative, what about defining a "CHAIN_ID" variable to arbitrarily name a new toolchain. if i'm building an SH3-based toolchain for my HP jornada 690, i could override the normal directory structure by defining, say CHAIN_ID=jornada, and that would produce the directory structure: results/ jornada/ ... the actual results ... this not only simplifies the directory structure, but allows one to distinguish between subtly-different builds that aren't currently handled by TOOLCOMBO. (if CHAIN_ID is not defined, the default would be to do what it does now, so it's totally backwards compatible.) thoughts? rday p.s. a couple additional thoughts. first, it's not clear whether or not the build process *needs* to have those intermediate directories as they are. according to yaghmour in "building embedded linux systems," p. 115, he suggests that the GNU toolchain utilities really want to see directory names containing $TARGET and $PREFIX but i'm not sure what that means. is there some hard requirement that those directory names be there for the build process to actually work? also, it would be useful if those directory names were used consistently. note the difference in naming conventions between the build and results directories for a single build: results/${TOOLCOMBO}/${TARGET} build/${TARGET}/${TOOLCOMBO} ------ Want more information? See the CrossGCC FAQ, http://www.objsw.com/CrossGCC/ Want to unsubscribe? Send a note to crossgcc-unsubscribe@sources.redhat.com
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |