Stuart Brorson wrote: > > I thought about doing something like this. Then I tried to build GHDL > (and gcc-4.0.2) manually. (I build all the CD's packages manually > first so as to understand how they build when I put them into the CD.) > Compilation of gcc (with vhdl enabled) failed on my FC1 machine. > Therefore, I am leaning strongly towards just putting the tarballs on > the CD for the user to find and manually install. Unless, of course, > I find my self with a lot of free time before the next CD > release. . . . . > > Stuart >
Were you able to spend some more time on that? I managed to compile ghdl under suse 9.3 and 10.0 manually. Now I am not an expert, so I am not sure whether I will run into some other trouble. Here is what I did. I used: - ghdl-0.20.tar.bz2 - gcc-core-4.0.2.tar.bz2 >From suse have the ada compiler installed from the standard distribution. Based on the ghdl installation instruction, unpacked both files and copied the vhdl folder from ghdl into the gcc-4.0.2/gcc folder. Created a /usr/local/ghdl folder. Run ./configure with the options: --enable-languages=vhdl --prefix=/usr/local/ghdl --program-prefix=ghdl- Running make and make install worked without problem. (I left out that some commands have to be run as su) Setting the path to /usr/local/ghdl/bin I was able to compile and simulate the examples given in the ghdl manual. My thinking was to have ghdl be separate from the standard gcc installation. That is why I added the program-prefix option. But as I said, I am not an expert, so maybe down the road I will run into trouble with that? Thought this might be of interest to somebody. Guenter
