Of course in this case HOST_WIDE_INT is 64. I think we do guarantee
that, or cross compilation would be in big trouble.
No, it wouldn't be in big trouble: it didn't used to be 64 and it wasn't in
big trouble. The issue isn't if it *works*, but if the two compilers do the
identical thing with the same source and that's not something we guarantee.
The point is that 32->64 is a cross-compiler and it's only meaningful to talk
about "bootstrapping" a native compiler.
Comparing:
cd gcc make stage1-bubble (*)
make cd gcc
<<< debug >>> <<< debug >>>
make bootstrap cd ..
make gnatlib_and_tools make
I'm confused as to exactly what the "make" on the right side builds. Of
course I forgot about the upper-level "make" before the "check", but it's not
needed before "check-ada": for that all I want is "make gnatlib_and_tools",
but you don't show the equivalent for that.
(**) Thanks to other Ada build improvements by Nathanael Nerode, this
subsumes both "make bootstrap" within the gcc directory plus "make
gnatlib_and_tools".
But I don't *want* to use the libada mechanism: I need to use the present
mechanism where the Ada library and tools are built within the gcc/
directory. It's indeed nice to have the libada mechanism as an option when a
full build is done, but it's not what's wanted during a development cycle.
