Re: can build toolchain in two steps, but not one

[Dan Kegel <dank at kegel dot com>]

Dan Kegel wrote:
> > > having just spent 13 hours driving across 5 states, i'm in the mood to
> > > play devil's advocate. 
> >
> >
> >
> > Then I'll wait until you're in a better mood, I guess.
> >
> > If there's a bug in the kernel, it should be fixed.  Period.
>
>
> I should have added: this has nothing to do with crosstool.

Sigh.  I'm too cranky to post intelligibly today, it seems.

> if you're dead set on being able to compile the kernel source while
> building a toolchain,

I'm not.  I think everybody should use the sanitized headers
when building a toolchain.

What I am dead set about is that if you see a bug in an open source
project, and you're one of the few people who knows how to
fix it, you should contribute a fix.  In this case, you
said there is a bug in a kernel Makefile.  You should,
ethically speaking, attempt to contribute a fix back
to the kernel project.

As I said, this has nothing to do with building toolchains,
and very little to do with crosstool.  Sure, the patch
would be gladly accepted into the crosstool patch
archive, but that's neither here nor there.

If you still don't understand my point of view,
let's just forget it.  It really isn't worth arguing over.
- Dan

--
Trying to get a job as a c++ developer?  See http://kegel.com/academy/getting-hired.html

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