On 8/26/07, Brian Dessent <brian@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > NightStrike wrote: > > > If I place gmp and mpfr within the gcc directory structure and build > > gcc without using the --with-gmp/mpfr options, gcc compiles (I > > believe) static versions of gmp and mpfr. How can I find out what all > > the options are that gcc uses to build those two things? There are a > > number of options available to configure for both gmp and mpfr, and I > > am curious how gcc is compiling them. > > It passes --disable-shared and it changes the first field of host and > target to "none", that's about it. "none" for the CPU tells gmp to > select the generic C implementation, and not use any of the CPU-specific > assembly code: Is that why I get these messages while at the all-gmp stage: configure: WARNING: cannot check for properly working vsnprintf when cross compiling, will assume it's ok libtool: link: warning: undefined symbols not allowed in none-pc-cygwin shared libraries And these while at the all-mpfr stage: configure: WARNING: In the future, Autoconf will not detect cross-tools whose name does not start with the host triplet. If you think this configuration is useful to you, please write to autoconf@xxxxxxxx ? Is it possible to address that in any way? Will Autoconf be changing such that compiling gmp/mpfr in the gcc tree isn't possible? Why would you want to strip out the CPU optimizations anyway? If target is known to the top-level configure (for instance, in my case, it's x86_64-pc-mingw32), why can't that be passed down to the gmp/mpfr configures?
