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] |
Albert Chin wrote: > > I'm attempting to build an arm-elf cross-compiler with GCC 3.0.4 under > HP-UX 11.00. I've built binutils and a bootstrap gcc as follows: > > $ PATH=$PATH:/tmp/armgcc/arm-elf/bin CC=/opt/TWWfsw/gcc304/bin/gcc \ What on earth this PATH-setting is doing here? > When trying to build newlib 1.9.0: > > $ gzip -dc newlib-1.9.0.tar.gz | tar xf - > $ cd newlib-1.9.0 > $ PATH=$PATH:/tmp/armgcc/arm-elf/bin ./configure --target=arm-elf \ > --prefix=/tmp/armgcc > *** This configuration is not supported in the following subdirectories: > target-libgloss > (Any other directories should still work fine.) > Created "Makefile" in /opt/build/newlib-1.9.0 using "mh-frag" > /tmp/armgcc304/lib/gcc-lib/arm-elf/3.0.4/../../../../arm-elf/bin/ld: > cannot open crt0.o: No such file or directory > collect2: ld returned 1 exit status > *** The command 'gcc -o conftest -g -O2 conftest.c' failed. When trying to compile and link a native app for HP-UX, the arm-elf-targeted 'ld' will be found first because of the PATH-setting and a pure mess is the expected result... > Any ideas? I believe that crt0 is part of newlib but if I cannot built > newlib, how do I get crt0? Don't ever use PATH for setting search paths for GCC, see the default search paths using 'gcc -print-search-dirs' etc., and add more directories there using the 'GCC_EXEC_PREFIX'... Consult your GCC-manual about these things : "Environment Settings for GCC" or something there... If you can build the 'arm-elf' targeted GCC yourself, there is no reason to not use the default '$prefix/$target/bin' for the target binutils, so that the GCC and the binutils configured using them will work perfectly together... Then even the GCC_EXEC_PREFIX is not necessary. I remember the messing with PATH being very common among the HP-UX users, meanwhile all the other GCC-users never use it to point to the GNU binutils... So there must be some FAQ or something the HP-UX-users all have read, and it saying that the GNU binutils must be pointed with PATH or something... Any clues about where you got this idea? Cheers, Kai ------ 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] |