Kai Henningsen <kai.extern@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > When building a cross compiler, gcc gets installed at least twice, > once as $prefix/bin/$target-gcc (long) and once as > $prefix/$target/bin/gcc (short name), with byte-for-byte identical > executables. This is normal. > There does not seem to b a problem with the long-name variant. > However, the short-name variant cannot seem to find it's own > components (cc1, -lgcc, and so on). This is normal. > I seem to recall that this used to > work (and that compiling something for target was easiest done > prepending $prefix/$target/bin to $PATH and then configuring and > building as if non-cross). No. The binaries in $prefix/$target/bin are not expected to work and you should not put that directory on your PATH. It's possible that from time to time they do work, but that is not guaranteed. That directory and those files exist so that gcc can reinvoke itself in certain unusual cases under a known name. When it does reinvoke itself, it passes the environment variables and command line options required to make everything work correctly. (The cases where gcc reinvokes itself are when it needs to compile code at link time, as is required for global constructor/destructors on certain targets and for template instantiation when using -frepo in some cases.) Ian
