On 30 November 2010 19:04, Mr Dash Four wrote: > >>> Yes, it is true that I originally wanted to use GCC as a cross compiler >>> and >>> because it did not work I set myself to build it from source to correct >>> that >>> mistake. Later on it was established that GCC, supposedly, should already >>> function as a cross compiler which later on transpired NOT to be the case >>> as >>> >> >> It patently *is* the case that GCC can function in that way, and it's >> the default if you build from source. >> > > Functioning GCC - yes. GCC functioning as a cross-compiler - NO! *sigh* If you build from SRPM, no. But if you build from source (not from an SRPM) following the instructions at http://gcc.gnu.org/install/ then it works fine. I do it several times a week. On Fedora. Again, not from an SRPM using a spec file. Of course, to actually compile 32-bit software I need glibc-devel.i686 installed too. But the GCC I build, FROM SOURCE, is a multilib compiler with 64-bit and 32-bit libstdc++ installed. > Not, unless one spends a few days writing in this mailing list until it > becomes clear that a couple of additional *GCC* packages need to be > installed for GCC to function as 'advertised', i.e. with the > cross-compilation working. You're talking about building RPMs from SRPMs using rpmbuild and a spec file. I'm not. >>> when I was installing the *Fedora-distributed* GCC RPM all the i686 >>> dependencies which enable GCC to function as a cross compiler were not >>> picked up and subsequently not installed. If they were I won't be >>> starting >>> this thread in this mailing list. >>> >> >> And Andrew and I have both said why the 32-bit "dependencies" are not >> hard dependencies: because that way it's not possible to get a >> 64-bit-only compiler. > > Right from the start Andrew have said that GCC, by default, when installed, > is cross-compiling. That, clearly, is not the case as I already pointed out > on numerous occasions. If you think that it is, then keep dreaming and best > of luck! I do it several times a week. > Besides, I am not at all interested in getting '64-bit-only' compiler - that > is not the purpose I started this thread. I am interested in getting a > cross-compiler. To me the term 'cross-compiling' means to be able to compile > binaries for more than one architecture (i686 and x86_64 in my case). Right, but *other people* are interested in that. The way it works now means they can have it their way and you can have it your way, if you install some additional packages. > They way things are at present, GCC, as installed by Fedora, does NOT > cross-compile, despite what you, Andrew, John Doe or whoever else may claim. > It may be a '64-bit-only' compiler, yes, but certainly isn't a > cross-compiler. Yes, because you need to install some i686 packages. > Secondly, if I want to build GCC purely from source as a cross-compiler > (yes, from source - without using additional binaries from the same package) > using the gcc.spec file I can't - not without extensive editing and messing > about with the said file and even then I would still need to install > additional GCC binaries (binaries from the same group of packages I am > trying to build, no less!) in order to make the whole thing work! > > If you, Andrew or anyone else think that's OK - well, keep deluding > yourselves. For the last time, I'm not talking about building with a spec file.
