This is the mail archive of the crossgcc@sourceware.org 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 a static toolchain ?

I can add a few more comments. In my case I have a variety of distros
that have incompatible glibc versions. To lessen the burden of
maintaining multiple toolchain builds, a single static gcc gets the
job done. However, be aware that gcc RAM usage is considerably higher
when compiling.

On 3/31/10, Trevor Woerner <twoerner@gmail.com> wrote:
> Okay, thanks so much for the information!
>
> Just out of curiosity:
>
> 1. Since newer glibc's are compatible with older glibc's (but not the
> other way around) is it not possible to take the latest glibc and
> lower the 'minimum supported kernel version'?
>
> 2. If you have built your toolchain statically linked to an older
> glibc then wouldn't it would mean you couldn't compile programs which
> use newer system calls (e.g. futex, inotify)?
>
> --
> For unsubscribe information see http://sourceware.org/lists.html#faq
>
>

-- 
Sent from my mobile device

--
For unsubscribe information see http://sourceware.org/lists.html#faq
Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]