[uClibc]cvs commit to uClibc by andersen

[Erik Andersen]

On Thu Apr 05, 2001 at 11:34:19AM +0200, Michael Shmulevich wrote:
> Erik,
> 
> I honestly think it is not a good idea. I use the compiler when 
> compiling the library itself.

You mean in unistd/Makefile, or something else?
I do not think using the uClibc compiler wrapper is a good
idea as part of the build process.  I think we should use the
native system compiler for all such interum steps.  The results
should be exactly the same, except there will be less pain when
trying to (on a native system) bootstrap a new arch.

That said, if you can show how this is bad, I'll happily revert 
the change.

> What was the motivation?

You can't use the compiler to link anything vs a uClibc library
that is not yet built, can you?

It just seems wrong to me -- if we are using a native compiler to build the
library, then why not use the native compiler to build any interum native
binaries?  If I was bootstrapping on ia64 for example, but the arch wasn't
working correctly yet such that gcc-uClibc produced binaries linked with uClibc
that crash instantly, I would not be benefitted by trying to use uClibc based
native apps as part of the build process.

So the right fix is to fix up unistd/Makefile so it uses the 
native compiler.  And we need to fixup Config to specify
a TARGET_CC and a NATIVE_CC so we can use the right one.

 -Erik

--
Erik B. Andersen   email:  andersen at lineo.com
--This message was written using 73% post-consumer electrons--