Re: building bleeding-edge sh3eb toolchain with sanitized headers

["Robert P. J. Day" <rpjday at mindspring dot com>]

On Sat, 9 Apr 2005, Arno Schuring wrote:

>
> [...]
>
> > - install sanitized headers in build directory where kernel source
> >  would normally go, and:
> >
> >  symlink "asm" -> "asm-sh"
> >  copy in "asm-sh/ubc.h" from 2.6.11.2 regular source tree
> >  symlink "cpu" -> "cpu-sh3"
>
> The "copy-in" step from regular source tree is a definite ouch. Do
> you have any clue as to why it is missing from the linux-libc
> headers? You might want to file a bug report against
> linux-libc-headers for it, I'm not sure how much attention sh3
> gets...

i already sent mariusz a note about that, haven't heard back.  i tried
to make sure i wasn't misreading something but it seems pretty clear
that that file has to be there, at least for an SH build.  not sure
about other architectures.

> I posted a patch for crosstool a few days ago which effectively does
> the steps you described above, do you think it is worth it if we
> would extend that patch to create the cpu->cpu-sh{2,3,4} link too?
> I'm a little hesitant myself, because we would be redoing (part of)
> the kernel's make prepare, but if that is the only way to get
> crosstool build a toolchain with sanitized headers for sh3...

i'm a bit nervous too, since it's not clear what different
architectures do for "make prepare"  obviously, the user would have to
identify which SH arch he was building for, or extract it from the
name.

> Maybe other arches need things like this as well?

you're getting outside of my comfort zone here.  i'll need time to
poke around a bit more.  has a patch been submitted to handle
sanitized header files officially?

rday

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