installing a cross compiler
William A. Gatliff
Thu Oct 11 08:22:00 GMT 2001
On Thu, Oct 11, 2001 at 03:51:43PM +0100, David Korn wrote:
> >-----Original Message-----
> >From: William A. Gatliff [ mailto:email@example.com ]
> >Sent: 11 October 2001 15:38
> >Also, I haven't checked in a while, but doesn't even the native
> >compiler have a target name applied by default? If so, that would
> >protect you even in the native case.
> Nope, that's why CC=gcc works in generic *nix makefiles to select
> the native compiler.
Yea, but that doesn't explain how the "cc" got there in the first place.
OTOH, looks like when I configure gcc without a --target, I get both a
"i686-pc-linux-gnu-gcc" *and* a "gcc". So we're both right. :^)
Hmmm, so configure *does* think for the user some. Scary.
> But no kind of file access control in the world will prevent your
> files being deleted if your house catches fire.
Which is why I have a co-lo server located downtown at my own expense
(being an independent consultant, it's always at my own expense) that
houses my CVS repositories, which I'm religious about. I do updates
about twice a day.
So if my house does burn down (I had a lightning strike here last
year, but no fire other than the one in my oven and a telephone wire),
I may lose an in-process build and a few drafts, but nothing older
than a few hours.
> I think it is a necessity to behave as if losing files or disks
> was a 100% guaranteed certainty that will one day need to be dealt
> with and recovered from, rather than a danger which you might
> perhaps manage to avoid. IOW, backups are the only real answer.
I couldn't agree more. But I still don't work as root, so that I can
avoid the lost productivity of doing something stupid. I can't
prevent an Act of God, but runing as a luser catches pretty much
> months. (There's no sound in the world quite as hideous as the
> noise made by a ball bearing in the HD motor shattering into
> shrapnel, the graunching noise as it tries to keep spinning the
> platter and succeeds mostly in scattering shards of ballbearing
> around the inside of the HD still haunts my nightmares).
Having grown up on a farm, I've heard lots of scary noises on some
very expensive machines. But I still don't think I would like to hear
my hard drive coming apart! :^(
> I'm now convinced that reliability has come down as prices have
> dropped and manufacturing rates have ramped up, and that modern
> cheap IDE HDs should be regarded as not safe unless backed-up.
Agreed. That's partly why I switched to SCSI (I also like the
performance boost). I'm suspicious that the SCSI drives are built on
the same mechanical base as the IDEs, though, so I'm not sure if I
have really accomplished anything other than going faster until
breakage. But man, these 10K rpm IBM DeskStar SCIS drives are
schweet! Bring on the gcc and glibc builds!
Right, enough of that then.
Want more information? See the CrossGCC FAQ, http://www.objsw.com/CrossGCC/
Want to unsubscribe? Send a note to firstname.lastname@example.org
More information about the crossgcc