On Thu, 2006-06-22 at 15:10 +0200, Enrico Scholz wrote:
> mailinglists@xxxxxxxxxxxx (Erwin Rol) writes:
>
> > what would be the correct installation path for a cross-compiler and
> > it's support include files and libraries ?
>
> We are packaging the cross stuff in the following way:
>
> /usr/
> |-- bin/
> | |-- arm-xscale-linux-uclibc-ar -> ../arm-xscale-linux-uclibc/bin/ar
> | |-- arm-xscale-linux-uclibc-gcc -> ../arm-xscale-linux-uclibc/bin/gcc
> | ... ditto for the other devel tools ...
> | ... in fact, some 'alternative' magic is involved too ...
> |
> |-- arm-xscale-linux-uclibc
> | |-- bin/
> | | `-- ... lot of host executable files ...
> | `-- sys-root/
> | |-- bin/
> | | |-- busybox
> | | ... lot of target binaries ...
> | |-- lib/
> | |-- ld-uClibc-0.9.28.so
> | ... lot of target libraries ...
> |-- lib/
> | |-- gcc/
> | | |-- arm-xscale-linux-uclibc/
> | | | |-- 4.1.1/
> | | | | ... lot of gcc 4.1.1 target files ...
> |
> |-- libexec/
> | |-- gcc/
> | | |-- arm-xscale-linux-uclibc/
> | | | |-- 4.1.1/
> | | | | ... lot of gcc 4.1.1 host files ...
>
>
> /usr/$ARCH/sys-root is packaged relocatable but it is a good place for
> target libraries and include files because gcc/binutils are looking
> there for them.
Glad to see we can agree upon something :)
This structure is largely identical to what we use (No surprise this is
the structure hard-coded into GCC).
In fact it is identical to that what we use for sys-rooted cross
toolchains (linux->{cygwin|freebsd|mingw|solaris}; target binaries
preinstalled to sys-root when building GCC).
The only major difference is you using sys-root, and us using
$prefix/$target/{include|lib}, which probably stems from you using a
sys-rooted built and us using a traditional one-tree style bootstrap
(libc built simultaneously to GCC). For the latter, sys-root is unused
and superfluous (actually it is harmful, cf. fixincludes).
Ralf
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
