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

See the CrossGCC FAQ for lots more information.


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: Building cross compiler for Solaris2 and PATH_MAX


>-----Original Message-----
>From: Ronan Daly [mailto:ronan.daly@sse.ie]
>Sent: 30 January 2002 15:43

>>   You're building a cross compiler here, rather than a native compiler,
>> so the default prefix setting will be /usr/local rather than /usr (and
>> indeed you VERY much do NOT want to install a cross compiler directly
>> under /usr as you risk damaging your native compiler and thereby getting
>> into an un-recoverable position.)
>
>I thought the idea was, you'd have all the compilers installed with the
>same prefix, so you can select which one you want to use by passing
>in a switch (-b I think)

  Well, as I said, it's a safety precaution.  What most people do is install
into /usr/local, and select the appropriate target by calling the relevant
gcc-driver, such as sparc-sun-solaris2.8-gcc, directly.  The -b mechanism
is a bit dubious IIRC, since the drivers for the various targets do actually
differ slightly - all the differences are *supposed* to be abstracted away
into the 'specs' file, but I think sometimes some of the predefined
search paths differ.

>I've looked at the preprocessed source from the compilation of this file,
>here's some of the output from the command
>./xgcc -B/usr/sparc-sun-solaris2.8/bin/ -B./ 
>-I/usr/sparc-sun-solaris2.8/inc
>lude -DCROSS_COMPILE -DIN_GCC -DHAIFA    -g -I./include  -I. 
>-I. -I./config 
>-I./../include -c -E -dD ./config/sparc/gmon-sol2.c
>
>--- output ---
># 173 "/usr/sparc-sun-solaris2.8/include/limits.h"
>
>
>#define ATEXIT_MAX      32
>#define _XOPEN_IOV_MAX  16
>#define IOV_MAX         _XOPEN_IOV_MAX
>--- output ---
>
>So you can see, the file is getting included and macros are getting
>defined, however the PATH_MAX macro isn't, because of the conditional
>statement in which it is contained.

  Yep, you're certainly right there.  I wonder if any of those flags are
chosen by configure based on whether you're using gnu or native toolchain
to build the compiler with.  Can you show us the configure command line
that you used?


        DaveK
-- 
Burn your ID card!  http://www.optional-identity.org.uk/
Help support the campaign, copy this into your .sig!


**********************************************************************
This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and
intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they
are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify
the system manager.

This footnote also confirms that this email message has been swept by
MIMEsweeper for the presence of computer viruses.

www.mimesweeper.com
**********************************************************************

------
Want more information?  See the CrossGCC FAQ, http://www.objsw.com/CrossGCC/
Want to unsubscribe? Send a note to crossgcc-unsubscribe@sources.redhat.com


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