Rebuilding gcc 3.3.1 under cygwin?

Tim Prince
Mon Sep 15 02:01:00 GMT 2003

On Sunday 14 September 2003 11:11, John D Rogers wrote:
> Hello, Timothy Prince.
> I read your email entitled "Results for 3.3.1 (cygming special) testsuite
> on i686-pc-cygwin "
>  with interest, an I have some questions for you :
> 1.)  What revision of cygwin did you use to rebuild gcc?
I'm sure, whether I reply on or off list, I will raise a number of serious 
objections.  wjm, or whatever.
I gathered test results on my installation of the binary 
available by setup, probably built by cgf.  I have rebuilt, using the cygwin 
3.3.1 source, on a current standard cygwin 1.5.4, but it's too slow to be 
practical on the laptop I normally use, and I won't waste anyone's time 
speculating on the reasons.  Last I saw on the list, it was still indicated 
that cross builds on linux were used for the releases, so our 
attempts at native builds don't duplicate the standard conditions.  If I 
succeed in refreshing cygwin on a newer XP laptop, I will have another go at 
it.  Apparently, it's more difficult to build gcc native with all the cygwin 
features patched on, than with the generic gcc source, but it's still 
> 2.)  What where th parameters you can to the configure script?
gcc -v gives you the parameters used or implied.  The posix-threads and 
sjlj-exceptions selections, deserve particular attention.  java won't be 
built unless specified under --enable-languages and --enable-libgcj.   When I 
build with a --prefix other than /usr, I copy the cygwin /include directory 
to the position implied by --prefix, before configuring.  The compile flags 
switches you set before configuring also may be relevant.  I normally build 
with pentium3 options, since I don't have anything older than that available, 
and I normally turn off -g and turn on -pipe in BOOT_CFLAGS.  The libf2c 
build needs -g -mwin32 in CFLAGS, but that doesn't affect testsuite results.
> 3.)  What was the exact command line you used to do the build? Or, put
> another way, did you do a "make bootstrap", or just a "make"?
make bootstrap-lean
> The reason I'm asking :
> I'm trying to rebuild gcc for my own purposes, and am running into a
> difficulty.  I'm guessing that either my procedure is wrong, I'm using the
> wrong tools, or something else I haven't thought of yet  8-)
> Also, one last question : did you have a previous release of gcc installed,
> and if so, what revision?
I've always tried to remember to update my cygwin to the current default 
version before building gcc natively on cygwin.  I do often use the last 
installed generic gcc to bootstrap the next.  Not sure if that answers the 
question, but it's certainly way off the topic of my post to which you 
referred.  That post apparently was outside the acceptable range for the list 
It has been a long time since it was difficult to build generic gcc on a 
standard cygwin installation on Win2K.  The core cygwin maintainers deserve 
the credit for that.  I'm not sure whether the thousands of hours some of the 
rest of us spent on testing and debugging gcc for cygwin had any influence; 
maybe little, as far as those who never use sse, or g77, or objc, or math 
inlines, and don't care about performance, are concerned.
> Thanks for any information you can share!
> John D. Rogers    jrogers at theworld dot com

Tim Prince

Unsubscribe info:
Problem reports:

More information about the Cygwin mailing list