This is the mail archive of the crossgcc@sourceware.org mailing list for the crossgcc project.

See crosstool-NG 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]

AW: [crosstool-ng/crosstool-ng] 59a784: No need to copy header; libc_start_file does it.


Alexey,

could you elaborate on this one?
Why would a sysroot "imply a file system"?
Why would "bare metal" not be an OS? It's simply an OS unknown to the toolchain.
Furthermore, I can't see these relationships you claimed between a sysrooted toolchain and an OS or even target file system.

A sysroot allows (us) to cleanly separate 3rd party libs from compiler/syslibs installation
(which is very favourable if you want to generate a system installation from sysroot but not gratuitous otherwise).

Regards,
Titus

-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
Von: crossgcc-owner@sourceware.org [mailto:crossgcc-owner@sourceware.org] Im Auftrag von Alexey Neyman
Gesendet: Samstag, 14. Januar 2017 06:45
An: crossgcc@sourceware.org
Betreff: [crosstool-ng/crosstool-ng] 59a784: No need to copy header; libc_start_file does it.


  Log Message:
  -----------
  Do not use sysroot in bare metal.

None of the bare metal C library choices (avr-libc, newlib) support installing into sysroot. Nor does it make any sense, since sysroot implies a file system, which in turn implies an OS.


  Commit: 949cc86ab755ff4fb5971a304ce97c3885fc360e
      https://github.com/crosstool-ng/crosstool-ng/commit/949cc86ab755ff4fb5971a304ce97c3885fc360e
  Author: Alexey Neyman <stilor@att.net>
  Date:   2017-01-13 (Fri, 13 Jan 2017)

  Changed paths:
    M config/toolchain.in
    M scripts/build/cc/100-gcc.sh
    M scripts/build/libc/newlib.sh


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]