Re: Using crosstool-ng 1.7.0, unable to find -lstdc++when compiling c++

[Chris Morgan <chmorgan at gmail dot com>]

On Wednesday, June 9, 2010, Chris Morgan <chmorgan@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wednesday, June 9, 2010, Yann E. MORIN
> <yann.morin.1998@anciens.enib.fr> wrote:
>> Chris, All,
>>
>> On Wednesday 09 June 2010 02:18:00 Chris Morgan wrote:
>>> I think I've made some progress. It looks like the arguments passed to
>>> the makefile in build-cc-core-baremetal are missing a target that
>>> would have built libstdc++.a.
>>> If I run 'make' with no arguments in build-cc-core-baremetal I see
>>> several libraries built, including libstdc++. A 'find -name *.a' finds
>>> libstdc++.a after the make.
>>
>> Yes, I just tested it, and it builds a libstdc++.a. That's positive! :-)
>>
>>> What I can't tell is where in scripts/gcc.sh, it looks like right at
>>> line 216 or 219, and what target it missing. I looked in the Makefile
>>> but I can't figure out which target to use. Maybe something changed in
>>> the later releases of gcc that moved the libstdc++ target outside of
>>> the ones specified in gcc.sh?
>>
>> I'm looking into this right now... It seems it fits on lines 236+. But it's
>> worse than it, because libstdc++ requires headers that are isntalled by the
>> C library. This means it will probably require using cc_core_pass_2... :-(
>>
>> Regards,
>> Yann E. MORIN.
>>
>> --
>> .-----------------.--------------------.------------------.--------------------.
>> | ?Yann E. MORIN ?| Real-Time Embedded | /"\ ASCII RIBBON | Erics' conspiracy: |
>> | +33 662 376 056 | Software ?Designer | \ / CAMPAIGN ? ? | ?___ ? ? ? ? ? ? ? |
>> | +33 223 225 172 `------------.-------: ?X ?AGAINST ? ? ?| ?\e/ ?There is no ?|
>> | http://ymorin.is-a-geek.org/ | _/*\_ | / \ HTML MAIL ? ?| ? v ? conspiracy. ?|
>> '------------------------------^-------^------------------^--------------------'
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> The issue is having to do another make/install pass after the first
> one or is that build target more time consuming? I don't really
> understand the gcc build flow at this point.
>
> Chris
>

So I see that this pass 2 is something in the gcc.sh script.

I presume there is a reason why a straight make, without command line
arguments, is not acceptible in do_cc_core()?

I'd like the toolchain to be built correctly. How can I help?

Chris

--
For unsubscribe information see http://sourceware.org/lists.html#faq