[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: gcc-2.6.3


knarf@nasim.cube.net (Frank Bartels) wrote:
> I don't think it's a good idea to put the system's standard compiler
> under /usr/local. And as gcc is our default compiler, I vote for the
> following (4.4BSD style) pathnames:
> /usr/bin/cc
> /usr/bin/gcc [symbolic link to /usr/bin/cc]
> /usr/bin/cpp [a shellscript executing the real cpp]
> /usr/libexec/cpp
> /usr/libexec/cc1
> /usr/libexec/cc1plus

Hmm, I just took the paths as they were in the gcc Makefile. Maybe we should
define or take a standard for the filesystem. As things in MiNT are most
BSD-like we should follow that. 

> Includes go into /usr/include and libs to /usr/lib/libname.a. We still
> have to find a solution for the kernel dependant includes. Our
> includes don't need to be fixed (by fixinclude - otherwise - maybe ;)
> > 4. mint-gcc-m68000-lib46.tar.gz
> >    The original mintlibs 46, put in the correct Path. (no libgcc)
> In the correct path? You call
> /usr/local/lib/gcc-lib/m68000-mint/2.6.3/gnu.olb
> the correct path for the libc? Sorry, but you misunderstood something
> here. This path is only intended to hold the compiler dependant
> library (libgcc.a) and nothing else.

OK, my main intention was to put the library in a path, where the linker will 
find it without asking any enviroment variables. The reason is the the handling
of the default libs for linking since gcc-2.6.x. 
> Bye,
> Knarf

cu, michi
* Michael Plonus                                   michi@pluto.ping.de    *
* 44143 Dortmund                       Michael_Plonus@do2.maus.ruhr.de    *
* Germany                                                                 *