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]

Re: Crosstool-NG configure requirements


On Sun, 16 Aug 2009, Yann E. MORIN wrote:
> On Friday 14 August 2009 09:18:53 Michael Abbott wrote:
> > > BTW, how long does it take to build the afore-mentioned tools (as a ratio
> > > of the entire toolchain build-time)? You may entice me to make crosstool-NG
> > > build them prior to the actual toolchain build (although we'd need some
> > > sharing, should the user build multiple toolchains in the same work dir).
> > Well I have a separate local install path which I can just prepend to 
> > $PATH, and a separate toolkit stage which everything depends on.  In a way 
> > it could be part of your initial install step?
> The idea is that those tools should be built once and for all. Then
> it would make sense to build them at the initial 'make' incantation.

Yes, that sounds right.

> Do those tools depend one on the others? If not, then we'd just build them
> with crosstool-NG's 'build' rule (the default one), and only install them
> with crosstool-NG's 'install' rule. If there are dependencies, then we must
> think carefully: I would not expect anything to be installed without asking
> for it. So we'd have to install dependable tools in a temporary place, tell
> each tools to find the ones it depends on in there.

Yes, I'm afraid they do.  I'm pretty sure they all depend on m4, and I 
think the build order I use, m4, autoconf, automake, libtool, reflects 
their dependencies (though I expect autoconf and automake are independent 
of each other).

Unfortuately I've no idea what the minimum required version of each is, 
all I know is that my RHEL4 box's installations weren't up to the job.  I 
actually build these versions:
	m4		1.4.12
	autoconf	2.63
	automake	1.10.2
	libtool		2.2.4
but these were probably the most recent versions when I last had to fix 
things.  Still, we can wire these (or more recent) versions in for now.

> > So, on this rather creaky old RHEL4 box building powerpc-unknown-linux-gnu 
> > took 150 minutes (sigh).  The corresponding build of m4, autoconf, 
> > automake and libtool takes one minute and 12 seconds!  (Hmm.  Let me try 
> > that again: yep.)  More than half of that is m4, and most time is spent in 
> > configure, but all that matters is the bottom line: 1/125th of the total 
> > build time is needed environmental tools.
> Well, that's almost zilch. :-) Let's have our own versions that we know
> work, and let's get rid of the ./configure check.

I suppose that is cleaner and safer than checking the installed versions, 
and only building if necessary, but it seems a little wasteful...

> Would you care to prepare a patch? I'll be off from 20090820 -> 20090828
> with scarse net access, but without any machine on which to work [ or my
> girlfriend would hit me hard enough that I would not do it again! ;-) ].

Well, I'll have a poke around: where do you think everything should go?  
I'm also about to be off for a fortnight at the end of this week, so I'm 
not sure that I'll get anything done before, but I'll try and have a look.

Yes, it's a good idea to leave the machine behind on holiday!

--
For unsubscribe information see http://sourceware.org/lists.html#faq


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]