Jeremy Huntwork wrote: > On 3/16/12 3:22 AM, Bryan Kadzban wrote: >> That being said, is editing the pass1 gcc sources with sed (editing >> the STANDARD_STARTFILE_PREFIX_? values, and the header directories) >> better, or worse, than reverting upstream changes in pass2? I >> don't suppose there's a way to avoid both; that'd be too easy. :-) > > The word revert alone should raise red flags. :)
If you assume upstream always does the right thing, anyway. :-) OTOH,
not assuming that means you need to figure out the entire source tree of
basically everything. Though I think I am a lot more familiar with
glibc now...
> Also, keep in mind that with the current build method, even after we
> adjust the toolchain, we _still_ have to use -B to get the compiler
> to work properly. I'm not saying there's something inherently wrong
> with -B, but I think it shows that the method is broken - our
> compiler should be fully configured to know and find our temporary
> libc on its own.
Well, from the comments in the book, it's not libc; it's crt1/crt0/crtn,
or whatever the files are named these days.
(Which is why I was looking into specs file editing in the previous
message. Doesn't look terribly promising, but I don't know the full
story behind the existing setup, either, so I don't know for *sure* that
it's affecting the search for startfiles, or how...)
Our life would be a lot simpler if there was better support for the
"standard" autoconf tendency to automatically find stuff in the same
prefix as the current package is being configured to install into. :-/
>> As for searching the host, I'm not entirely sure which way to go
>> there. What does the current-book pass1 gcc binary say, if you do
>> something like:
>>
>> echo 'main(){}' | /whatever/gcc -v -xc -Wl,-verbose -
>>
>> for the include path order and the linker SEARCH_DIR()s? Where
>> does it find crt1.o, libgcc, libc, ld-linux.so.2 (or the 64-bit
>> ld.so), etc.? How does that compare to the sysroot pass1 build? (I
>> assume there's no change in the chapter 6 build, or ICA should pick
>> it up. The pass2 build is not likely to be that different,
>> although that might be interesting to double check as well.)
>
> I had this, but can't seem to find the logs at the moment... I'll try
> to re-gen and provide an answer shortly.
OK, whenever. Thanks!
One other thing I'm concerned about is enabling multilib for my own
builds, if we do this setup, without having to go all the way into the
CLFS (IMO-)crazy with cloog and ppl and eglibc and whatever else. I
might be able to get away with simply removing --disable-multilib, and
then building all the libraries twice with the proper -m flags, but it's
been a while and I don't remember for sure. :-/ (OTOH it may be quite
a while before I rebuild this system.)
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
-- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
