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] |
On Sun, 16 Aug 2009, Yann E. MORIN wrote: > On Friday 14 August 2009 09:18:53 Michael Abbott wrote: > > > BTW, how long does it take to build the afore-mentioned tools (as a ratio > > > of the entire toolchain build-time)? You may entice me to make crosstool-NG > > > build them prior to the actual toolchain build (although we'd need some > > > sharing, should the user build multiple toolchains in the same work dir). > > Well I have a separate local install path which I can just prepend to > > $PATH, and a separate toolkit stage which everything depends on. In a way > > it could be part of your initial install step? > The idea is that those tools should be built once and for all. Then > it would make sense to build them at the initial 'make' incantation. Yes, that sounds right. > Do those tools depend one on the others? If not, then we'd just build them > with crosstool-NG's 'build' rule (the default one), and only install them > with crosstool-NG's 'install' rule. If there are dependencies, then we must > think carefully: I would not expect anything to be installed without asking > for it. So we'd have to install dependable tools in a temporary place, tell > each tools to find the ones it depends on in there. Yes, I'm afraid they do. I'm pretty sure they all depend on m4, and I think the build order I use, m4, autoconf, automake, libtool, reflects their dependencies (though I expect autoconf and automake are independent of each other). Unfortuately I've no idea what the minimum required version of each is, all I know is that my RHEL4 box's installations weren't up to the job. I actually build these versions: m4 1.4.12 autoconf 2.63 automake 1.10.2 libtool 2.2.4 but these were probably the most recent versions when I last had to fix things. Still, we can wire these (or more recent) versions in for now. > > So, on this rather creaky old RHEL4 box building powerpc-unknown-linux-gnu > > took 150 minutes (sigh). The corresponding build of m4, autoconf, > > automake and libtool takes one minute and 12 seconds! (Hmm. Let me try > > that again: yep.) More than half of that is m4, and most time is spent in > > configure, but all that matters is the bottom line: 1/125th of the total > > build time is needed environmental tools. > Well, that's almost zilch. :-) Let's have our own versions that we know > work, and let's get rid of the ./configure check. I suppose that is cleaner and safer than checking the installed versions, and only building if necessary, but it seems a little wasteful... > Would you care to prepare a patch? I'll be off from 20090820 -> 20090828 > with scarse net access, but without any machine on which to work [ or my > girlfriend would hit me hard enough that I would not do it again! ;-) ]. Well, I'll have a poke around: where do you think everything should go? I'm also about to be off for a fortnight at the end of this week, so I'm not sure that I'll get anything done before, but I'll try and have a look. Yes, it's a good idea to leave the machine behind on holiday! -- 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] |