Installing headers with 0.9.29 spawns gcc errors

Yann E. MORIN yann.morin.1998 at anciens.enib.fr
Fri May 18 08:01:39 UTC 2007


Khem, Paul,
all,

On Friday 18 May 2007 02:14, Khem Raj wrote:
> Paul Brook wrote:
> > This is definitely wrong. The output of the compiler depends on the 
> > configuration of and options passed to the compiler.
> > For example, on x86-64 machines asm/unistd.h defines different sets of 
> > syscalls depending whether it's in 32-bit or 64-bit mode.
> > If you don't have a target compiler available you simply can't generate this 
> > header.

So, as of today's svn, building a cross-toolchain can be considered broken.

> I think one way is to have a minimal cross compiler generated before 
> making uclibc headers
> thats a change in the build order and would need no changes in the 
> makefiles.

[Hmm, I'd rather change the Makefile than build a compiler!]

So, to build a cross-toolchain with uClibc, we need, in order:
  - kernel headers
  - binutils
  - bare-metal xgcc
  - uClibc headers
  - 'bootstrap' xgcc
  - uClibc
  - complete/final xgcc

I'll be poking at how buildroot handles this.

Regards,
Yann E. MORIN.

-- 
.-----------------.--------------------.------------------.--------------------.
|  Yann E. MORIN  | Real-Time Embedded | /"\ ASCII RIBBON | Erics' conspiracy: |
| +0/33 662376056 | Software  Designer | \ / CAMPAIGN     |   ^                |
| --==< °_° >==-- °------------.-------:  X  AGAINST      |  /e\  There is no  |
| http://ymorin.is-a-geek.org/ | (*_*) | / \ HTML MAIL    |  """  conspiracy.  |
°------------------------------°-------°------------------°--------------------°




More information about the uClibc mailing list