> [Oyvind] - do not copy newlib/libgloss into gcc source directory Really? I can see reasons for and against and suspect I see a problem (or at least something I don't understand) with the "merged tree". Specifically, if I'm building multiple configurations, I should be able to put newlib in the one source tree, but only use it for certain configurations, such as embedded and Cygwin. ? Maybe -disable-newlib is the answer? e.g. mkdir /obj/linuxx86-native cd /obj/linuxx86-native /src/gcc/configure -disable-newlib -host i686-pc-linux -target i686-pc-linux && make && make install mkdir /obj/cygwin-cross cd /obj/cygwin-cross /src/gcc/configure -with-newlib -host i686-pc-linux -target -i686-pc-cygwin && make && make install mkdir /obj/cygwin-canada cd /obj/cygwin-canada /src/gcc/configure -with-newlib -host i686-pc-cygwin -target -i686-pc-cygwin && make && make install DESTDIR=/somewhere ? Ideally it is more automatic than that though. Ideally toplevel configure just knows when newlib makes sense. Plus, it is ambiguous -- is it newlib for host or target? I have a sneaking suspicion that there's a lot of ambigous stuff that way -- host vs. target. At least for CC and such, there is CC (for host), CC_FOR_BUILD, CC_FOR_TARGET. Similarly -with-sysroot (host), and -with-build-sysroot. Perhaps everything that matters has already been "multiplied out"? I'll have to try it at some point.. - Jay
