Re: bringing back 'make symlinks'?

[Dan Kegel]

Sam Ravnborg wrote:
> On Tue, May 25, 2004 at 08:45:18AM -0700, Dan Kegel wrote:
>
> > In the 2.4 kernel, 'make symlinks' created the symlinks needed
> > to use the kernel tree's headers for building a gcc/glibc toolchain.
> >
> > In the 2.6 kernel, you can do the same thing with 'include include/asm'.
> > Unless you're trying to build arm or cris, or maybe others, in which case 
> > you also need 'include/asm-$(ARCH)/.arch'.
> ...
>
> In current 2.6 there exitst a target named: modules_prepare
> It does a bit more than what symlinks did in 2.4 - actually prepare for
> building external modules.

Right, and that's a problem, because the 'bit more' it does
requires a target compiler -- which isn't available while
bootstrapping the target compiler!

The way things are now, I can build toolchains for everything
except the sh architecture (though my toolchain bootstrap script
is ugly as noted due to the lack of 'make symlinks').
I'm not sure if the sh architecture makefile even has targets
to make all the needed symlinks in the absense of a working
target compiler; I'll look at that and maybe submit a minimal
patch when I get a chance.
- Dan

--
My technical stuff: http://kegel.com
My politics: see http://www.misleader.org for examples of why I'm for regime change
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/