Static linked cross tools
Tue Oct 19 14:42:00 GMT 2004
> So the question is:
> Why do you want statically linked tools? Do you need to run the tools
> different systems with different libraries, or any other reason to not
> dynamic libraries *to run the tools in the toolchain*? Or do you only
> your crosstools to generate statically linked programs?
We want to build the executables statically linked so they can run on
different workstations. Typically we put the development tools on a
server and everyone uses the same toolchain. This does not mean that we
do not want to create dynamically linked programs.
> - For statically linked crosstools, but still the ability to build
> dynamically linked targets:
> # I would advice against using BINUTILS_EXTRA_CONFIG since it's issued
> # to configure - we don't need that
> make $BINUTILS_MAKE_OPTIONS all
I believe I tried this and it did not work. I will try again. Perhaps
there was something else wrong with my environment.
> # final gcc only
> make $GCC_MAKE_OPTIONS all
GCC didn't seem to mind building as per the new scripts. The problem
was building BINUTILS.
> - To generate a dynamically linked toolchain, only suited to generate
> (this is untested by me)
> I do not believe the above are mutually exclusive, you can probably
> use both
> to generate a statically linked toolchain that can only generate
> linked targets.
> I have little time to spare on my hands now, I'm sorry I can't give
> you any
> tested configurations. I have generated several statically linked
> by hand, using above sequence, though.
What version of BINUTILS have you built?
BTW: I could not find instructions for statically linking BINUTILS or
GCC. Is there a website that explains these options?
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