[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: strip in rpmbuild



On Sun, 2006-06-25 at 11:08 +0200, Erwin Rol wrote:
> On Sun, 2006-06-25 at 10:59 +0200, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
> > On Sun, 2006-06-25 at 10:43 +0200, Erwin Rol wrote:
> > > On Sun, 2006-06-25 at 07:41 +0200, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
> > > > On Sun, 2006-06-25 at 04:55 +0200, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
> > > 
> > > Ralf,
> > > 
> > > > FYI: I've uploaded my FC5->Mingw cross toolchain to Packman.
> > > > ftp://ftp.uni-erlangen.de/pub/mirrors/packman/fedora/5
> > > 
> > > I took a short look at your spec files, do I understand correctly that
> > > you use the binary versions of mingw32-runtime and w32api to bootstrap
> > > your compiler build ?
> > Yes, I am using the original target libraries and build a sys-rooted
> > cross-toolchains from it.
> > 
> > That's basically the same approach, you'd apply to building a native
> > GCC/binutils for hosts with closed source libc (e.g. commercial *nixes).
> 
> What i did was rebuild the mingw32 and w32api from the source, and was
> wondering how you solved the circular dependencies,
The standard approach would be to build a minimal gcc first, use this
gcc to build a libc, then rebuild a "full gcc".

For newlib-based targets (such as rtems), a special exception exists:
For them, newlib/libc can be built simultaneously with GCC.

>  of course when using
> the binaries there is no circular dependency :-)
Exactly. It also has another advantage: Nothing can be "more original"
than the "original" - I.e. why rebuilding target libs when you can use
the original files?


Ralf




[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]