Re: Is it possible to do a combined gcc build, that includes the avr-lib?

David Fernandez <[email protected]>
Newsgroups gmane.comp.hardware.avr.gcc
Message-ID <[email protected]>
Well, I was expecting a better integration with gcc, as with newlib, so that I could use the same procedure to build the toolchain from sources (RPM packaging and the like).

The bootstrapping phase you mention, I guess would be required if you build gcc to run on the target. I never needed to do that for ARM compilers if I build a cross-compiler to run in my desktop machine and generate ARM code (may be the build machinery does that internally)...

Never mind, I'll manage.

Regards
David

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Message: 1
Date: Tue, 11 Feb 2014 08:23:36 +0100 (MET)
From:[email protected]  (Joerg Wunsch)
To:[email protected]
Subject: Re: [avr-gcc-list] Is it possible to do a combined gcc build
	that	includes the avr-lib?
Message-ID:<[email protected]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii

David Fernandez<[email protected]>  wrote:

> Does anybody know if it is possible to do a combined gcc build including
> the avr-lib, similar to what can be done for newlib (where I can symlink
> newlib and libgloss inside gcc sources)?

Curious: what would you expect from that, as opposed to do what
everyone else does, and compile the library once the compiler is
done?

AFAICT, the newlib thing is a little different: for architectures
where GCC needs a target library itself (e.g. for stdio), you have
to create a bootstrap GCC, then compile the library, and then
re-iterate over the GCC build to continue with those parts that could
not be done before.

But for the AVR target, that's not necessary.  (I know it the way above
from ARM targets.)
-- cheers, Joerg .-.-. --... ...-- -.. . DL8DTL 
http://www.sax.de/~joerg/ Never trust an operating system you don't have 
sources for.
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.