This is the mail archive of the
binutils@sources.redhat.com
mailing list for the binutils project.
Re: binutils install question
- From: 2boxers <2boxers at comcast dot net>
- To: Elias Athanasopoulos <eathan at otenet dot gr>
- Cc: binutils-ml <binutils at sources dot redhat dot com>
- Date: Fri, 08 Nov 2002 08:29:04 -0500
- Subject: Re: binutils install question
- References: <026601c286e0$961f1190$021ca8c0@helm><20021108115949.C3759@neutrino.particles.org>
> On Thu, Nov 07, 2002 at 11:37:46PM -0500, 2boxers wrote:
> > After binutils is built and 'make install' is run, assuming the the
prefix
> > is set to a directory in /usr/local/..., is it sufficient to just create
> > symbolic links to the binaries from a directory that is in the path or
is it
> > necessary to also link/update header files and/or anything else?
>
> I put them in /usr/local/bin and have the latter before /usr/bin in my
> $PATH. So everything I compile is linked, assembled with as, ld from
> /usr/local/bin (i.e. latest).
...and what of the files in /usr/local/include?
Shouldn't these header files replace the ones in /usr/include?
What if another program needs to include bfd.h for example, will it not be
getting the older version from /usr/include instead of /usr/local/include?