[Bug bootstrap/28962] building a cross compiler with --disable-multilib fails

2008-12-28 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 


--- Comment #9 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org  2008-12-28 21:28 ---
You should disable libmudflap and libssp (in newer gcc's) if you want to build
a cross compiler to start stage1.


-- 

pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
 Resolution||INVALID


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28962

[Bug bootstrap/28962] building a cross compiler with --disable-multilib fails

2006-09-13 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 


--- Comment #8 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org  2006-09-13 06:23 ---
(In reply to comment #7)
 Is there a good reason why gcc can't officially support being built without a
 libc by either figuring out that there's no libc itself or by offering some
 kind of --i-do-not-have-a-libc option to configure?

Yes because you are configuring wrong in the first place.
Try looking at what crosstool does for how to build a cross compiler.
http://kegel.com/crosstool/


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28962

[Bug bootstrap/28962] building a cross compiler with --disable-multilib fails

2006-09-06 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 


--- Comment #6 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org  2006-09-06 16:32 ---
/usr/local/DIR/gcc-powerpc64-svn20060906/powerpc64-linux/sys-include -O2 -g -O2
   conftest.c  5
/usr/local/bin/powerpc64-linux-ld: crt1.o: No such file: No such file or
directory
collect2: ld returned 1 exit status


That means you don't have binutils/glibc installed correctly.
And this is not a regression anyways.


-- 

pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:

   What|Removed |Added

  Known to fail|4.0.3 4.1.1 4.2.0   |
  Known to work|3.4.6   |
Summary|[4.0/4.1/4.2 regression]|building a cross compiler
   |building a cross compiler   |with --disable-multilib
   |with --disable-multilib |fails
   |fails   |


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28962

[Bug bootstrap/28962] building a cross compiler with --disable-multilib fails

2006-09-06 Thread bunk at stusta dot de 


--- Comment #7 from bunk at stusta dot de  2006-09-06 17:22 ---
I don't have a glibc for this target.

But this might be where my problems are coming from:

I am able to compile gcc 4.1.1 for at about a dozen targets without having any
libc for these targets present. And the resulting compilers work fine for my
purposes (cross-compiling Linux kernels).

But the configure options I had to figure out for doing this seem to indicate
that this is a working but not documented setup.

It seems sending a bug report for part of this wasn't the right solution.

Is there a good reason why gcc can't officially support being built without a
libc by either figuring out that there's no libc itself or by offering some
kind of --i-do-not-have-a-libc option to configure?


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28962