From:	Rob Kramer <robk AT starhub DOT net DOT sg>
Newsgroups:	comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Subject:	Re: Small problem cross-building CVS DJGPP.
Date:	Wed, 12 Jun 2002 14:02:57 +0800
Organization:	Singapore Telecommunications Ltd
Lines:	52
Message-ID:	<ae6os9$3om$1@clematis.singnet.com.sg>
References:	<Pine DOT A41 DOT 4 DOT 05 DOT 10206120852390 DOT 34616-100000 AT ieva06>
NNTP-Posting-Host:	bb-203-125-72-35.singnet.com.sg
Mime-Version:	1.0
User-Agent:	KNode/0.7.1
To:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com
DJ-Gateway:	from newsgroup comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Reply-To:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com

Hi,

You're fast! :)

Andris Pavenis wrote:
> Never met such problem (I have setup DJGPP CVS being built from cron task
> at night when there are changes in CVS version). Try using
> gcc command line options -print-prog-name and -print-search-dirs to try to
> understand what happens. Here is what I'm getting from these commands:
> 
> bash-2.05a$ i586-pc-msdosdjgpp-gcc -print-prog-name=as
> /usr/bin/i586-pc-msdosdjgpp-as

~> i586-pc-msdosdjgpp-gcc -print-prog-name=as
as

~> i586-pc-msdosdjgpp-gcc -print-prog-name=ld
ld

Oops!

~> i586-pc-msdosdjgpp-gcc -print-search-dirs
install: /opt/djgpp/lib/gcc-lib/i586-pc-msdosdjgpp/2.95.3/
programs: 
/opt/djgpp/lib/gcc-lib/i586-pc-msdosdjgpp/2.95.3/:/opt/djgpp/lib/gcc-lib/i586-pc-msdosdjgpp/:/usr/lib/gcc/i586-pc-msdosdjgpp/2.95.3/:/usr/lib/gcc/i586-pc-msdosdjgpp/:/opt/djgpp/i586-pc-msdosdjgpp/bin/i586-pc-msdosdjgpp/2.95.3/:/opt/djgpp/i586-pc-msdosdjgpp/bin/
libraries: 
/opt/djgpp/lib/gcc-lib/i586-pc-msdosdjgpp/2.95.3/:/usr/lib/gcc/i586-pc-msdosdjgpp/2.95.3/:/opt/djgpp/i586-pc-msdosdjgpp/lib/i586-pc-msdosdjgpp/2.95.3/:/opt/djgpp/i586-pc-msdosdjgpp/lib/

~> i586-pc-msdosdjgpp-gcc -v
Reading specs from /opt/djgpp/lib/gcc-lib/i586-pc-msdosdjgpp/2.95.3/specs
gcc version 2.95.3 20010315/djgpp (release)

A lot less info here unfortunately, but that might be because you use gcc 
3.1.

> --with-as=/usr/bin/i586-pc-msdosdjgpp-as
> --with-ld=/usr/bin/i586-pc-msdosdjgpp-ld --disable-nls --prefix=/usr

I dont't think I configured these paths explicitly. Could that be the 
problem, or are they detected anyway by configure? Hmm, I guess this is 
what went wrong.

> I hope You have compiled cross-binutils at the same prefix. I don't know
> whether it matters, but having the same prefix for both cross-gcc and
> cross-binutils surely will not harm

Yes, same prefix.

Cheers,

    Rob

- Raw text -