[PATCH] Fix unified tree breakage

[Alexandre Oliva]

On Oct  5, 2005, Paolo Bonzini <paolo.bonzini@lu.unisi.ch> wrote:

> In 4.2, we'll have *toplevel* bootstrap enabled by default.  This is
> what you saw indicated as "@if gcc-bootstrap", and it means that the
> toplevel orchestrates a 3-stage build of libiberty, binutils, and
> everything else up to gcc.  In this case it will just work because
> stage1 will use the system assembler/linker, and stage2/3 will use the
> previous stage of the in-tree assembler/linker:

This is not good.  It means the libgcc build uses one pair of
assembler/linker different from the one that gets installed.  Each
stage must use its own assembler/linker to build the GCC libraries.

> there is no need to do "all-prebootstrap", because the packages in
> "all-prebootstrap" are all bootstrapped (together with GCC).

I think this has to be done for all stages, and every stage must use
its own assembler/linker pair to build any target libraries (libgcc
included), otherwise the point of bootstrapping is sort of missed.

> BTW, with toplevel bootstrap, it could make much more sense to use a
> unified tree in a native configuration.

Too bad the unified tree won't be as trivial to create as checking out
uberbaum as soon as GCC moves to subversion :-(

-- 
Alexandre Oliva         http://www.lsd.ic.unicamp.br/~oliva/
Red Hat Compiler Engineer   aoliva@{redhat.com, gcc.gnu.org}
Free Software Evangelist  oliva@{lsd.ic.unicamp.br, gnu.org}