This is the mail archive of the binutils@sources.redhat.com mailing list for the binutils project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: Problems with using libtool dependencies in opcodes


On Mar 10, 2004, Daniel Jacobowitz <drow@mvista.com> wrote:

> On Wed, Mar 10, 2004 at 03:29:29AM -0300, Alexandre Oliva wrote:

>> As soon as you configured your toolchain to install in /usr/local/lib,
>> you're saying /usr/local is a directory that contains and/or will
>> contain libraries for the host.

> That's the most useless behavior I've ever encountered.  The logical
> corollary is that it is not possible to configure --prefix=/usr on a
> build machine without implying that /usr/lib contains libraries for the
> host, in other words, that it is not possible to cross-build native
> system tools using libtool, with $build != $host, _by design_?

You're right.  This is a big problem.  Fortunately, it's not in the
design, only in the implementation.

Ideally, libtool should not tack on run-time -L flags when linking
with a library that is yet to be installed.  Unfortunately, this is
quite difficult to implement.  Patches are most definitely welcome.

> Let's try this from the other end then.  I want binutils installed on
> my target in /usr.  I want to build it on a $build != $host system.
> How would you recommend configuring it?

I'd configure it for a different prefix, and then take advantage of
relocatability of the tree to get it to run on /usr/local.  Yuck.

-- 
Alexandre Oliva             http://www.ic.unicamp.br/~oliva/
Red Hat Compiler Engineer   aoliva@{redhat.com, gcc.gnu.org}
Free Software Evangelist  oliva@{lsd.ic.unicamp.br, gnu.org}


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]