Hi! On 2025-06-02T22:01:44+0530, Arijit Kumar Das <arijitkdgit.offic...@gmail.com> wrote: >> Umm, I don't think so. I've been building crosses with gcc for decades. >> It should not be necessary, though it may sometimes be convenient.
Right. Similarly to how it's, for example, documented on <https://www.gnu.org/software/gcc/simtest-howto.html>, also the build instructions for GCC '--target=nvptx-none' that I gave Arijit use a combined tree (just GCC plus newlib). You might indeed consider that's just for convenience: let the top-level build system figure out at which stage to build newlib, instead of manually doing C-only GCC '--without-headers' etc., then build newlib with that, then rebuild full GCC, etc. >> If you feel there's a strong need, then you're going to have to make a >> better case than what you've done above. Specifically you'd need to >> start with why the standard cross build procedures don't work for nptx. I'd consider the combined tree build one "standard cross build procedure" (in addition to the "manual" one), but I also agree with Jeff that special-casing just newlib isn't the way to go, given there are indeed many more additional/optional packages that the top-level build system can handle, as mentioned in <https://inbox.sourceware.org/d463a70e-b586-40ce-b778-2e3d54b31...@gmail.com>. (..., or, what about the long-standing idea that the top-level build system should in fact be its own software package, instead of being duplicated in GCC, binutils/GDB (and others?)... But we digress...) I've learned to live with: $ git status On branch [...] Your branch is ahead of 'upstream/master' by 69 commits. (use "git push" to publish your local commits) Untracked files: (use "git add <file>..." to include in what will be committed) newlib nothing added to commit but untracked files present (use "git add" to track) ;-) > I think I'll defer to my mentors Thomas and Tobias for an explanation > regarding this. > > I'm a new contributor to GCC and am currently working on a GSoC project > for implementing a simple VRAM file system on an offload target device > (nvptx-none) for running OpenMP/OpenACC related tests, along with > modifying the stub syscalls in newlib to interface with this file system. > > Building the offload compiler requires newlib to be present in the GCC > source tree root. My work would mainly be in newlib, so I thought adding > newlib to gitignore would be a good idea in case new test cases for GCC > might need to be added. In that case, I would need to remove and re-add > the newlib symlink for every GCC patch submitted. This is my > understanding. Please correct me if I'm wrong. Actually, with Git, it's easier: you 'git add' only the files that you care about, and just ignore 'newlib' in the top-level. Either way: Arijit, even if this one didn't get accepted, you've successfully executed the process: congratulations on your first GCC patch submission, on your own initiative -- way to go! :-D Grüße Thomas > On Mon, Jun 2, 2025 at 7:47 PM Jeff Law <jeffreya...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> >> >> On 6/2/25 3:01 AM, Arijit Kumar Das wrote: >> > Hi, >> > >> > When compiling GCC for targets like nvptx-none that require newlib, we >> > need to put newlib-cygwin/newlib in the root directory of the source >> > tree (either a copy or a symlink), which is then built by GCC when >> > targeting offload devices like the above. Changes made in newlib >> > shouldn't affect GCC, so I think we should include newlib in this case. >> Umm, I don't think so. I've been building crosses with gcc for decades. >> It should not be necessary, though it may sometimes be convenient. >> >> If you feel there's a strong need, then you're going to have to make a >> better case than what you've done above. Specifically you'd need to >> start with why the standard cross build procedures don't work for nptx. >> >> jeff
