Re: Problem building cross-gcc for powerpc-linux

[Dan Kegel <dank at kegel dot com>]

Kai Ruottu wrote:
> "William A. Gatliff" <bgat@billgatliff.com> wrote:
> > I've been looking at the problems in libgcc2.c, they're the ones that
> > make the ppc-linux target impossible to bootstrap.  No obvious fixes
> > in mind yet, unfortunately.
>
>  As people surely remember, I have considered these problems being
> only "attitude problems" and people can blame themselves if wanting
> to struggle with them...
>
> ... some cross-GCC builders building for this same target will
> continuously try to avoid installing any 'target headers and libs'
> before starting to build their GCCs, whatever problems this will
> cause them... Do the Linux/PPC-developers care ?  Of course not,
> stupidity is always stupidity and when the GCC-manual tells that
> those headers and libs must be there and people don't believe,
> what one can then do than let them try their tricks...
> ... Just as stupid as not copying stuff for Linux/PPC
> from some Linux/PPC distribution when producing tools for
> 'powerpc-linux-gnu'.
Hi Kai,
I think it's a reasonable goal to have a script that builds
gcc from just the virgin gnu gcc, binutils, and glibc (or newlib) sources.
It's important because that way, we know that the GNU sources
work.

Copying headers around is fine, as long as they all come from
the virgin gnu source tarballs, and not from a distribution.
Sure, using headers from a distribution is a convenient shortcut,
but if the goal is to make sure the gnu sources are complete,
you can't reach that goal by using sources from somewhere other than
gnu (like, say, a linux distribution).

So I think your disagreement with the cross-developers is
partly one of goals: you just want a working toolset,
and some of us want a working toolset built from pure gnu
released sources.  As long as we understand that these
are two different goals, there shouldn't be any friction.

- Dan

--
Dan Kegel
Linux User #78045
http://www.kegel.com