Michael Zintakis <michael.zintakis@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: >>> Where do I get these as I did check the gcc web site, but could not >>> find them anywhere (apologies for this daft request!) >>> >> >> http://sourceware.org/binutils/ >> > Thanks! Downloaded along with mpfr, ppl-0.11.2 (configure said that my > existing version is "buggy" :-) ) and cloog-ppl-0.15.9. > > If I dump mpfr, ppl and cloog-ppl in the main gcc source directory > (and name those directories like that - "mpfr", "ppl" and "cloog-ppl") > would that be enough for the GCC build or do I have to compile/install > them separately? As far as I know that is fine. I haven't done much with PPL myself. > If I copy binutils sources to the main gcc source directory what would > be the sign that they are incompatible - the same error as I was > getting before (line 83 etc)? No, the errors are much more subtle. I really can't encourage this unless you are prepared to investigate and solve problems yourself. >>>>> The strange thing is that my host machine GCC already has i686 and >>>>> x86_64 binutils installed (though as a "ready-made" package - I >>>>> haven't compiled this from source so can't vouch for the correctness >>>>> of these packages) and when I attempted to build GCC2 with >>>>> "--target=i686-redhat-linux" it also failed! I know the host GCC on >>>>> that machine works as I also do compilation for boh x86_64 and i686 >>>>> arches successfully. Maybe I am missing something else. >>>>> >>>> Read the FAQ entry I mentioned. >>>> >>> I did and it refers to the three libraries I have (although as sources >>> in the GCC source directory) or have I missed something? >>> >> >> What do you see in the config.log file? >> > The same one I was getting with the ppc target - line 83 etc etc. I'm sorry, I don't recall what that was. If it's a missing 'as' file then the simple answer is still going to be to install the binutils. At one time gcc would fall back to running 'as' even for a cross-compiler, but perhaps that is no longer the case. Ian
