This is the mail archive of the libc-alpha@sources.redhat.com mailing list for the glibc project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Installing glibc headers before building bootstrap gcc (was: Re:[PATCH] missing #ifndef inhibit_libc in gcc/config/rs6000/linux.h)


Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
On Tue, Oct 28, 2003 at 11:23:59PM -0800, Dan Kegel wrote:

Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:

Sadly, in order to build a proper Linux toolchain, inhibit_libc
is absolutely required, even on Linux.  This is because you have
to first build a bootstrap compiler without glibc.

This is a lie.

? The sequence required to build a Linux toolchain without
the build system's headers and libraries leaking in is
glibc: make install-headers (using native compiler)
gcc: make all-gcc install-gcc (with inhibit_libc defined, perhaps indirectly)

No. That's not at all necessary; just --disable-shared. I build gcc with just headers and no inhibit_libc every day.

I just tried building a bootstrap compiler without setting inhibit_libc, that is, without passing the option --with-newlib (which is customarily used when building bootstrap compilers precisely because it sets inhibit_libc). The build failed as expected with

In file included from /home/dank/crosstool-0.25/build/powerpc-405-linux-gnu/gcc-3.3.2-glibc-2.3.2/gcc-3.3.2/gcc/tsystem.h:72,
                 from /home/dank/crosstool-0.25/build/powerpc-405-linux-gnu/gcc-3.3.2-glibc-2.3.2/gcc-3.3.2/gcc/crtstuff.c:62:
/opt/crosstool/powerpc-405-linux-gnu/gcc-3.3.2-glibc-2.3.2/powerpc-405-linux-gnu/include/stdio.h:138:28: bits/stdio_lim.h: No such file or directory
make[1]: *** [crtbegin.o] Error 1

which is the same error I got earlier with the gcc-3.4 bug that
caused inhibit_libc to not be defined (see http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2003-08/msg00900.html ).

So either Daniel J. is configuring his bootstrap compiler --with-newlib, or
he's installing the glibc headers more cleverly than me such that he ends up with a working bits/stdio_lim.h.

Now, stdio_lim.h is one of those files that's generated during
glibc's "make install-headers" by running $(CC)
just as errlist-compat.c is.   In the past, I ran into trouble
trying to get glibc's Makefiles to generate them, so I bypass them.
Here's the snippet of crosstool.sh which install glibc's headers before
building the bootstrap compiler:

    CC=gcc \
            ${GLIBC_DIR}/configure --host=$TARGET --prefix=/usr \
            --build=$BUILD \
            --without-cvs --disable-sanity-checks --with-headers=${PREFIX}/${TARGET}/include \
            --enable-hacker-mode

    if grep -q GLIBC_2.3 ${GLIBC_DIR}/ChangeLog; then
        # glibc-2.3.x passes cross options to $(CC) when generating errlist-compat.c, which fails without a real cross-compiler.
        # Fortunately, we don't need errlist-compat.c, since we just need .h files,
        # so work around this by creating a fake errlist-compat.c and satisfying its dependencies.
        # Another workaround might be to tell configure to not use any cross options to $(CC).
        # The real fix would be to get install-headers to not generate errlist-compat.c.
        make sysdeps/gnu/errlist.c
        mkdir -p stdio-common
        touch stdio-common/errlist-compat.c
    fi
    make cross-compiling=yes install_root=${PREFIX}/${TARGET} prefix="" install-headers

Should I be doing it some other way?

- Dan


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