IainS wrote: > Note that (gcc) "make install-html" installs "libiberty.html" into > the doc dirs which says (amongst other things): > > -- that the library is used by "various GNU programs" > > -- " Passing --enable-install-libiberty to the configure script when > building libiberty causes the header files and archive library to be > installed when make install is run. > This option also takes an (optional) argument to specify the > installation location, in the same manner as --prefix." What this really means is whether to install the headers. The archive lib is always installed (incorrectly, as this thread surmises.) > I've not used that configure argument to gcc [ it's not listed by > (gcc) configure --help or on http://gcc.gnu.org/install/ > configure.html ] so presumably the html refers only to building the > library as a separate project. The output of the toplevel configure --help only lists options implemented at the toplevel, which is only a fraction of available options. Just because it's not listed there does not mean anything, because there are countless sub-configures. It is listed if you run libiberty/configure --help, and it works just fine if used to configure gcc -- it does not apply just when building the library as a separate project. But as above, what it really determines is whether the libiberty headers should be installed or not, and the default is no. > That way the user can keep track of which version is being linked. But you're missing the point: this copy that is installed is the host-libiberty not the target-libiberty. No code that gcc creates will use this library, it is totally extraneous and you can just delete it if it bothers you. I think it's just an artifact of the fact that gcc lives in a combined tree of many other packages, and the toplevel is shared between all of them. Brian
