[gccsdk] [GCCSDK commit] peter - r4189 - trunk/gcc4

Peter Naulls peter at chocky.org
Sun Nov 8 11:22:35 PST 2009


John Tytgat wrote:

> I know this is continuing on a change made in the past, but it still feels
> wrong to have tools running on the host hardware installed and deployed
> at $GCCSDK_INSTALL_ENV/bin, that really should be $GCCSDK_CROSS_PREFIX/bin
> together with the rest of the cross compiler toolchain.
> 
> We should expect that all binaries at $GCCSDK_INSTALL_ENV/bin are
> RISC OS binaries, like we expect that all libraries at
> $GCCSDK_INSTALL_ENV/lib are RISC OS libraries.
> And that all binaries at $GCCSDK_CROSS_PREFIX/bin (mmh, which is also
> $GCCSDK_INSTALL_CROSSBIN) are binaries running on the host computer, i.e.
> that platform on which the cross-compiler tools run on.
> 

I understand where you're coming from.  But in practice env/bin contains
mostly things which are used for builds - a lot of it library config
scripts, etc.  It does also contain a number of RISC OS binaries,
but their presence there is of questionable use.  These are mostly
things that are library utilities, and got installed along with them.

Finally, there are a couple of native binaries used for cross build
config - stuff like orbit-idl-2.   The reason I also put 'zip' here
is that it's build as part of the autobuilder.  I wanted to keep
cross/bin entirely for stuff built by the gcc4 tree.  It makes certain
clean builds and stuff easier, since you can remove each directory
independently.

I appreciate that there's something of a circular dependency here,
in that the packaging of GCC requires zip.  However, in practice
it will also require 'make' (the RISC OS binary) and perhaps other
stuff we choose to package with the !GCC app.

None of this is ideal, but it does seem the most practical after using
this setup for quite some time.




More information about the gcc mailing list