relocating the compiler and associated tools

[Kai Ruottu]

Robert P. J. Day wrote:

> just as another data point, i *relocated* the entire built SH3
> toolchain under /usr/local/sh3 (just for the heck of it), and blew
> away the original build.

  Instead of building the toolchain with wrong hard-wired paths, it is
usually assumed that :

  o the $prefix used is common for all (cross-)GCCs in the host platform,
    one wackoo like me can have 50 or more $target tools below just one
    common $prefix

  o each $target can have many GCCs for it, all these using the same rock
    solid C library in '$prefix/$target/...'

  o the installed GCCs can have common C and C++ headers, maybe also for
    Java, F77 and so on. The use of the $prefix/include is still unknown
    for me, unfortunately I have used the default $prefix and so the
    LOCAL_INCLUDE_DIR is the same as the PREFIX_INCLUDE_DIR. Anyway the
    '$prefix/include/c++/...' has those common C++ headers for all the
    GCCs made from the same version sources... And seemingly the
    $prefix/include should have all the common C headers.

  So the goal is that the GCC builder would think very carefully what
could be a suitable $prefix for all those GCCs one must build... For
those who like all kind of "standards" everywhere... For some systems
there even are well-known recommendations, like using '/opt/gcc' for
SVR4, '/mingw' for MinGW, '/cygwin' for Cygwin (or there once was).

  Then there are those creative people who would go up the walls if
needing to have some kind of order in something. Inventing a different
$prefix for each GCC build and then trying to succeed with all the
created mess is the perfect world for them...

  The reality is that programmers are mainly 'creative' and creating a
horrible mess is the ultimate goal, so trying to make a collection of
prebuilt GCCs for some runtime host will become very hard because of
this 'creativity' and not at all caring about any recommendations and
standards for the $prefix. So building everything oneself and using
some own standard for $prefix looks like being a good choice. If one
then voluntarily wants to create a mess, that cannot be at all
understood by us 'tidy' (at least sometimes) people...



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