question arised while comparing the Yaghmour, Hollabaugh and Kegel ways of creating a cross-compiler

Hello, all,

I have compared different books and online sources all creating a cross-compiler (see title). I think all 3's method to generate a cross-compiler are very much OK. However, trying to understand everything in all of the 3 methods, makes me wonder...

Where Yaghmour as well as Dan Kegel are patching (/hacking ?) a cross-compiled libc.so (Kegel also adds libpthread.so and libgcc_s.so because he's more recent ?), I don't see that happen in Hollabaugh's way of working. Because Hollabaugh compiles glibc twice, once with a bootstrap gcc (and a prefix on the host's directory structure), and later a second time, but then with the 'full-blown' crosscompiled gcc (and a prefix of /), installing with a custom install_root.

This last (i.e. Hollabaugh's) method seems the egg of Colombus to me, as it is simple and straightforward, not needing any libhack or other hack. But I guess there must be a reason why (Yaghmour and) Kegel don't use it ? Why would that be ?

The only reason I could think of, is that it's too time-consuming compiling twice the same thing ? Or are there on the contrary maybe other reasons for opting to hack some .so files ?

Kind regards,

PhB.

Reply to
flupp
Loading thread data ...

ElectronDepot website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.