On 05/05/2016 04:25 PM, Pip Cet wrote: > On 5/4/16, Andrew Haley <aph@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> On 05/04/2016 05:12 PM, Michael Habibi wrote: >> >>> However, my question is more general than that. Are there some >>> widely-used, accepted steps for building a cross-compiling >>> toolchain with gcc? I noticed that crosstool-ng does a 3 stage >>> build, where it builds an initial gcc for libc start files, then >>> rebuilds gcc for libc, then rebuilds gcc yet again with >>> libc. Other blogs suggest that two stages are enough. I settled on >>> doing a 2 stage build. I think my steps are fine, but I think some >>> of my configure options may need help (prefix vs sysroot vs >>> prefix+target, etc). But every set of instructions I look at are >>> different, and it seems no two blog posts, pdfs, wikis have landed >>> on the same procedure. >> >> That's the hard way. The easy way is to grab the root filesystem from >> your target machine and configure --with-sysroot=<target filesystem>. >> >> You really don't have to build libc for your target, and if your >> target already exists and has a libc you should not do so. > > But what if it doesn't? As long as the ABI hasn't been finalized, it > seems to me the only way to move forward is to rebuild gcc, glibc, and > binutils in lockstep. Then you need a really big hammer like crosstool. But almost everyone wanting a cross-compiler is not in this position. There are not very many people developing a new ABI. Sure, you exist, I get that. But for someone simply asking for a way to build a cross-compiling toolchain, my answer is far more likely to be appropriate. Andrew.
