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