This is the mail archive of the crossgcc@sources.redhat.com 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] |
On Tue, 9 Nov 2004, Arno Schuring wrote: > The first problem I would expect to run into is the problem that ld can't find > its crt1.o startup code. This is (usually/sometimes/on occasion) hardcoded > into ld at compile time. ld expects it to be at <prefix>/lib/crt1.o > > Now, suppose you copy your ld executable (and libraries), but leave > the old ones in place. ld would still search for <prefix>/lib/crt1.o > and would not complain - since it's still there. But this does not > mean that you succesfully relocated the entire toolchain. i did, in fact, rename the old directory to effectively move it out of the way, and everything still worked fine. (NOTE: by "worked fine", i still mean that the compile of a test program worked. i still have not had the opportunity to test it on the target board.) > Something I picked up from Dan: can you do a > [target-]gcc --print-file-name crt1.o > [target-]gcc --print-file-name specs > and tell us the output? I'd expect it to be printing the prefix'ed path > instead of the copied one. But I could be mistaken. > (another, more conclusive proof would be to remove/rename/backup your original > tree under <prefix>, and repeat the compile steps you performed earlier) i'll try that shortly. thanks. rday p.s. i didn't mean for this thread to take on a life of its own but, now that it's started, we might as well see it through. ------ Want more information? See the CrossGCC FAQ, http://www.objsw.com/CrossGCC/ Want to unsubscribe? Send a note to crossgcc-unsubscribe@sources.redhat.com
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |