Re: cross compilation tool versions
On Mon, Mar 20, 2000 at 08:19:05AM -0700, Jim Franklin wrote:
Thanks. egcs ought to work for the entire process - I chose to use the
most recent compiler for 2 reasons:
1) There were some significant improvements in the cross-compiler stuff
in the 2.95 series. This is not particularily important when staying on
an i386 platform, but very important when cross-compiling from other
platforms like UltraSparc.
2) Bigger, better, sexier optimizer. My system just 'feels' a touch
faster when compiled with 2.95.2 - I haven't substantiated this with
I need to go through the effort of figuring out how to setup OSKit &&
GNUMach. Once that is done, I will change the instructions so that egcs
isn't used at all. (Contributions welcome!! <hint, hint - for that and
any other 'help documentation that people want posted'>).
> Hi Jeff
> I really like your page on cross compilation. Is there any reason to
> not use egcs 1.1.2 for the entire process?
> Jeff Bailey wrote:
> > On Sun, Mar 19, 2000 at 10:11:43PM -0500, Colin Walters wrote:
> > I have documented what works for me at http://hurd.zugzug.com/ - The only
> > change I recommend from those is to update to Glibc 2.1.3, and that the
> > latest Hurd CVS can now be compiled with gcc 2.95.2.
> > I will update the instructions this week sometime.
> > > What versions of the various GNU tools do people use for a cross
> > > compilation environment from GNU/Linux?
> > >
> > > i.e. should I try using the latest GCC? Or would it be better to
> > > stick with 220.127.116.11? Are there any problems with the latest binutils?
> > > Knowing what is a currently working set will probably save me lots of
> > > time.
> > >
> > > --
> > > Colin Walters <email@example.com>
> > > http://web.verbum.org/levanti
> > > (1024D/C207843A) A580 5AA1 0887 2032 7EFB 19F4 9776 6282 C207 843A
> > --
> > There is no sin except stupidity.
> > - Oscar Wilde
There is no sin except stupidity.
- Oscar Wilde