Message-ID:	<382E8497.51CCA66F@softhome.net>
Date:	Sun, 14 Nov 1999 11:44:55 +0200
From:	Laurynas Biveinis <lauras AT softhome DOT net>
X-Mailer:	Mozilla 4.7 [en] (Win98; I)
X-Accept-Language:	lt,en
MIME-Version:	1.0
To:	Eli Zaretskii <eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il>
CC:	djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Subject:	Re: GCC porting questions
References:	<Pine DOT SUN DOT 3 DOT 91 DOT 991114115815 DOT 17579E-100000 AT is>
Reply-To:	djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com

Eli Zaretskii wrote:
> Sorry, I don't understand.  If that is the only way to build GCC, then
> how did we all build GCC without bootstrap being supported?

Bootstrap was simulated, but the actions carried out and the result were the 
same.

> Last time I looked, bootstrap was not required unless you didn't have a
> working installation of GCC.  Perhaps they've changed the definitions.

Maybe. I use gcc starting from 2.8.1. IIRC, there you had to bootstrap 
compiler manually by issuing 'make stage1', 'make stage2 CC="..."' and so 
on. But that was the ``official'' way to build GCC. EGCS and current GCC 
went further with 'make bootstrap'. Docs even don't talk about other 
possibilities, although they do exist.

Laurynas Biveinis

- Raw text -