Re: Standalone gcc library builds

[Koen Kooi <k.kooi@student.utwente.nl>]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 29-03-10 23:42, Richard Purdie wrote:
> On Mon, 2010-03-29 at 10:42 -0700, Khem Raj wrote:
>> I have had gcc build all runtimes libraries separately. I think we should
>> device gcc build and we can disable building certain directories via
>> --disable-<dir>. We dont have to stash libgcc. Its not a big library and
>> its probably better to rebuild it along with rest of runtime libraries IMO
>> and probably we should have packages for each language runtime so people
>> who dont need C++ or Java or fortran dont have to build those. The same
>> should be tunable in gcc builds too.
> 
> I talked with Khem on irc but just for the record here, I've done some
> testing with gcc 4.3.3 in Poky and have pushed my results to:
> 
> http://git.pokylinux.org/cgit.cgi/poky/log/?h=master-gcc-runtime-testing
> 
> This adds a gcc-runtime recipe which builds libgcc, libssp and libstdc++
> as test cases. It will be possible to build other runtime libs
> conditionally on whether they're enabled like libfortran easily enough.

Can't we have seperate recipes for ssp, stdc++, fortran, java, etc? I
don't think we need USEFLAGs for this when we build them seperately anyway.

regards,

Koen

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (Darwin)

iD8DBQFLscWDMkyGM64RGpERAiGWAKC3DUZnFvM4fiS5+eBj83MMJcLB2wCeOaEW
7qaQ7rDPo+K4cXaoZejxdJY=
=o64b
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----