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] |
> > Is there any reason not to use the obvious "simple, no patching needed" > > tuple: i386-uclibc-linux-gnu ? > > Which brings up the question: how about I start using the tuple > i386-glibc-linux-gnu > for crosstool's glibc toolchains, just to be uniform? > That second field is supposed to be for vendor name, but in the free > software world, the C library name seems like a good thing to stick there... I was under the impression that the -gnu fourth field specified C library. Thus, i386-glibc-linux-gnu would actually be calling out glibc twice, and i386-uclibc-linux-gnu would actually be calling out two different C libraries. That's why I chose to replace the -gnu suffix. -----Carl ------ 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] |