On 25 Jan 2008, at 8:16 AM, Michael Witten wrote:
On 24 Jan 2008, at 7:20 AM, Brian Dessent wrote:
Michael Witten wrote:
Can I build gcc in this way?
I've been trying for quite some time now to achieve such a
stripped down gcc, but it would seem that the gcc build
process insists on building these libraries, which I think
is wholly unnecessary.
You might be able to approximate this by "make all-gcc" and then
"make
install-gcc" (or just manually copying the xgcc to the destination.)
I'm a little uncomfortable just taking the xgcc that's left over when
the build fails.
I apologize.
For some reason, when I tried
make all-gcc
the build failed.
After getting a good night's rest and starting afresh,
I was able to build a 'naked' gcc using --without-headers,
a non-linux target, and your above suggestion.
That being said, part of the problem is that the build process
is neither well-documented nor intuitive--at least to me.
While I would love to contribute by improving this factor of gcc,
I would rather encourage somebody, who has an intimate familiarity
with the project, to take the time over a couple of weekends to
clarify the nuances and produce step-by-step (shell) instructions
for not only common tasks, but also the uncommon tasks; there's no
reason that this information should be hosted by other websites:
http://www.osdev.org/wiki/GCC_Cross-Compiler
That kind of documentation could go a long way in encouraging new
developers to get involved, because it would allow them to avoid
a first impression wrought with frustration.
Sincerely,
Michael Witten
