On Wed, 2007-06-13 at 09:16 -0600, Brendan Conoboy wrote: > Hans de Goede wrote: > > Afaik when it comes to linux-glibc details its the only way, notice that > > bootstrap=1 will be needed only once, but I though it would be good to > > have configurable in the spec, becaue maybe oneday with a new binutils > > /glibc it might be a good idea to redo from start. > > Without some gcc surgery, it is indeed the only way. This is what dwmw2 > is trying to talk about and I am trying to artfully avoid :-) Nah, wrt. to cross linux toolchains there are other ways. 1. If a native target distro exists, one can repackage the target's glibc binaries into a <target>-sys-root rpm, and then build gcc against this glibc. It's what I do in my toolchain packages. Some people hate it because "I don't build everything from scratch", but it has tremendous advantages. 2. The approach dwmw2 seems to hate is the nominal way to build gcc (build a --with-newlib c-only gcc, use this to build glibc, then rebuild a full fledged gcc) 3. Build incrementally. All you need to is to once insert a glibc sys-root binary into the buildsystem (by "bootstrap" or 1. or 2.), then subsequently build gcc and glibc from source. Some people also hate this, but it's essentally the same approach as glibc and gcc are being built on Fedora. Ralf -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
