On Sunday 08 June 2008 22:41, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > > > Then, running "make all-target-libgcc" built them, but I finally settled > > for just "make" - it didn't error out. > > Yes, the advantage of Paul's suggested process are not only that the > installations are reproducible and always use the complete feature set > of the underlying libc (that's the big part), but also that "make" just > works and you are more shielded from changes in the build system.
What is Paul's suggested process? I just reread his post again and it contains no suggestions what to do, it was useful in other way: he explained where my understanding of build process is incorrect: > > As far as I know, toolchain is built in this order: > > > > 1. binutils > > 2. C compiler > > 3. libc > > No. > > That usually only works if you already have the toolchain installed. In which > case ordering is irelevant, you can just build whichever component you want > to update. > > A full bootstrap process looks more like: > > 1) Binutils > 2) Whatever bits of compiler are required to produce... > 3) libc headers > 4) A basic C compiler+libgcc that is sufficient to build... > 5) libc > 6) A full compiler+runtime, c++, fortran, etc. If someone is willing to expand on the above and explain what exactly do I need to do in step 2, in step 3, in step 4, that would be helpful. -- vda
