Fwd: GCC 3.1 linux-to-mingw32 near success but still some questions remain ;-)

[Eugene Starokoltsev]

I have experienced the similar problems building both native and
arm-ecos-elf bunutils for Cygwin by GCC-3.1. I think that GCC 3.1 is buggy.
It can't build Libiberty library correctly not from old binutils nor from
Insight-5.1. To get working ARM tools I have built bunutils by checked
native Cygwin CC compiler. You can type "CC=cc " at the line before
"configure" script call to use native compiler instead of gcc 3.1

Eugene.



> First I apologize sending the 'ld.zip' onto this list, trying
> different email program as earlier seems to cause serious mistakes...
>
> I wrote:
>
> >  Don't know which is the latest 'acid-tested' binutils-version for
> > Win32, but I would expect the official '2.11.2' being near it...
>
>  Although I now have binutils-2.11 built for Mingw host/target,
> trying 2.11.2 caused a crash during the build with '_pe_bfd_'-
> something being undefined... Didn't find easily the reason...
>
> > Those who must build the binutils from src, must first
> > investigate which sources should work...
>
>  Or try to find out this info from the Mingw-maillist messages.
> I built the binutils-020716 for Linux/glibc-2.1.3 and Mingw/msvcrt-
> hosts using gcc-3.1.1-20020715 and the Windoze-hosted ones seemed
> to be unusable... A rebuild using gcc-2.95.3 make the executables
> being bigger but working.  So the toolchain is a little tricky...
> Somewhere there should be the "Build Your Own Linux-hosted and
> Mingw-targeted Cross-toolchain"-instructions, available via the
> 'http://www.mingw.org'...
>
>  Although updating to '20020716', I didn't remove my older
> '200204xx'-something tools, and these old tools were used with
> ten or more builds to Windoze and no serious problems were found.
> But still some 'acid tested' binutils-version for Win32-target
> should exist. If that could be some of the official FSF-releases,
> that could be nice...
>
>  The SourceForge Mingw-site keeping some weird '2.12.x.y.z' binutils
> instead of patches to some official FSF release (if necessary) or to
> some official (stable?) binutils snapshots, makes the situation more
> fragmented... Basically one would like to use one sources for as many
> targets as possible, not separate sources for every possible target.
> But usually this cannot be avoided.
>
> 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


------
Want more information?  See the CrossGCC FAQ, http://www.objsw.com/CrossGCC/
Want to unsubscribe? Send a note to crossgcc-unsubscribe@sources.redhat.com