Re: implications and importance of --prefix?? what about -static in GCC_EXTRA_CONFIG?

["Wolcott, Ken (MED, Compuware)" <Ken dot Wolcott at med dot ge dot com>]

On Tuesday 04 November 2003 11:53, Dan Kegel wrote:
> Wolcott, Ken (MED, Compuware) wrote:
> >   What is the implication/importance of using --prefix for configure?  If
> > the excuteable is written to /usr/local/bin, for example, can't I move
> > the binary to /opt and execute it successfully there?  The crux of the
> > question is that I need to place the cross compiler in clearcase -- does
> > the path I use with --prefix have to exactly match the path of the
> > binaries and libraries that I'm going to place into clearcase?
>
> Try 'strings /usr/bin/gcc | grep lib/gcc/' and you'll see one of the
> hardcoded paths.  The part to the left of the lib/gcc in the output is the
> value passed to --prefix during configure, I think.
>
> So yes, --prefix has to match exactly where you're going to run,
> unless you're using a very recent (say, released May 2003 or later)
> gcc, binutils, and gdb and are building them with --with-sysroot.
> Using --with-sysroot with a relative path gets rid of the hardcoded
> paths built in to the gcc binaries, or so I'm told. I haven't tried it yet.
> See
> http://linuxfromscratch.org/pipermail/lfs-hackers/2003-October/000075.html
>
> >   One more question...if I want a completely static cross toolchain
> > should I place -static in GCC_EXTRA_CONFIG?
>
> Maybe, but adding
>     LDFLAGS="-static"
> to the make commandline building the final compiler is what's recommended.
> See http://sources.redhat.com/ml/crossgcc/2003-10/msg00078.html
>
> - Dan

Hi Dan;

  I finally was successful in generating statically linked arm9 executeables, 
and I am grateful for that, thank you!

  Regarding --with-sysroot, should that be run only with binutils configure 
and the final gcc configure?  It seems that using this configure flag with 
the bootstrap configure doesn't make any sense...probably not with the kernel 
headers either...but what about glibc?  For my next experiment, I'll try just 
with binutils and the final gcc compile to see if that works...

Thanks,
Ken

------
Want more information?  See the CrossGCC FAQ, http://www.objsw.com/CrossGCC/
Want to unsubscribe? Send a note to crossgcc-unsubscribe@sources.redhat.com