https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50229
Eric Gallager <egallager at gcc dot gnu.org> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |egallager at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #27 from Eric Gallager <egallager at gcc dot gnu.org> --- (In reply to Iain Sandoe from comment #21) > (In reply to Francois-Xavier Coudert from comment #20) > > This PR appears to report two different issues: > > 1. cross-compiler targeting Darwin > > cross-compilers targeting Darwin <= 9 are possible using odcctools. > > For "the future" > I am working on a set of GCC patches and a GAS port that solves part of the > problem for newer cases. I intend to post these before stage#1 ends (but > time is short - esp. with trunk trashed on darwin at the moment). > > However the static linker remains an issue (I have a build of ld64-127.2 > which supports Darwin10, and ppc*) … however, this needs to be > forward-ported to the latest published sources for ld64 before it will > support "current" Darwin. > > In any event, it would be the User's responsibility to obtain a suitable SDK > for the target - by downloading the appropriate Xcode and extracting the SDK > as needed. > > in short: "can't be expected to work until there's a set of Darwin > 'binutils' supporting > darwin 9". (working on providing that). > > > 2. cross-compiler hosted on Darwin > > I do this all the time - it's possible to cross from x86_64-darwin12 -> > powerpc-darwin9, for example (assuming one has the relevant cctools and > ld64, and enough patience). > > I have also built native-crosses [x86-64-darwin12=build powerpc-darwin8 > host/target] for the record. > > Darwin works just fine as a host for cross-compilers to Linux. > > (building your own sysroot - in particular GLIBC can be a trial, but if you > make a sysroot from a standard distro, it's not hard). > > in short (2) is very definitely "works for me" So does this bug need to stay open then?