specifying native compiler
Tue Jan 3 18:52:00 GMT 2006
Dan Kegel wrote:
> On 1/3/06, Dave Korn <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
>>David Karlton wrote:
>>>I have crosstool-0.38 (kegel.com/crosstool), and want to build using a
>>>different gcc compiler that I have on my local machine. Many of the
>>>scripts seem to default to CC=gcc. Is there one meta-override so I
>>>could specify a different native compiler?
>> If I understand what you're asking right, and if I remember correctly, you
>>should just be able to write
>>CC=<your_gcc_version> script.name [-options]
> Nope, sorry, crosstool.sh doesn't obey that convention.
> There's even a hardcoded line or two like
> CC=gcc ...
> at one point in it.
> I'd say create a fake gcc script that invokes the desired compiler,
> and put that on your path. Alternately, modify crosstool.sh to uniformly
> use BUILD_CC, and make it easy for users to set that; then submit the
> change so others can benefit.
> - Dan
> p.s. Wow, a three-DK thread!
Even the synergy of the three-DK thread isn't enough for me to be able
to make big changes in crosstool.sh. I'm not quite experienced enough.
For the meantime, I'm running with a script in my path named "gcc"
that points to my alternative compiler (gcc32). The build is churning
as we speak...
The whole reason I got into this mess is that I am trying to compile
gcc-3.2.3-glibc-2.2.3 for MIPS, on Fedora Core 4. In so doing, I ran
into this issue:
Hence, the gcc32 attempt.
This is my second toolchain for MIPS (we're compiling for small set top
boxes that have varied installations of glibc & gcc libraries). I
managed to get gcc-3.3.4-glibc-2.3.2 working from a build on Fedora Core
4, with some patches in the glibc-2.3.2 configure script (to allow gcc
version 4+), and binutils (fixing a 60k bloat issue, previous thread
Want more information? See the CrossGCC FAQ, http://www.objsw.com/CrossGCC/
Want to unsubscribe? Send a note to email@example.com
More information about the crossgcc