> ../configure --enable-languages=pascal > make bootstrap > make install
Be careful, you might screw up the original gcc binary. The gcc-2.95.x/install/* did mention that if you use the "--enable-languages=" option, "make bootstrap" won't work. So, in the above case, "make bootstrap" will generate a copy of "gcc" which would be different from the case when you "make bootstrap" without the "--enable-languages=" option.
Before a fixed (and well tested) gpc INSTALL doc is released, I use the following work around.
1. build GCC without "--enable-languages" option. And make install. This does not build GPC. 2. backup the install-dir to a tar ball 3. build GPC with "--enable-languages=pascal" option. And make install. This build GPC with a "defective" GCC as by-product. Make Install. 4. restore the tar ball from step 2 back to the install-dir. This will over-write the "defective" GCC with the original good copy.
From: Russ Whitaker[SMTP:russwhit@mind.net] Sent: Wednesday, November 03, 1999 8:48 PM To: gpc@gnu.de Subject: latest snapshot using 2.95
Hi into directory src: downloaded latest gpc snapshot; then downloaded gcc-2.95.2
tar -vxzf the two files
found the directory structure of gcc-2.95 is different from 2.8. so mv gpc/p gcc-2.95.2/gcc cd gcc-2.95.2/gcc patch -s -p1 < p/diffs/gcc-2.95.diff
next followed the recomendation in the gcc install literature
cd ../.. mkdir gcc cd gcc ../configure --enable-languages=pascal make bootstrap make install
and you're done
hopes this helps Russ russwhit@mind.net
On 4 Nov 99, at 10:15, Mason Ip wrote:
../configure --enable-languages=pascal make bootstrap make install
Be careful, you might screw up the original gcc binary. The gcc-2.95.x/install/* did mention that if you use the "--enable-languages=" option, "make bootstrap" won't work. So, in the above case, "make bootstrap" will generate a copy of "gcc" which would be different from the case when you "make bootstrap" without the "--enable-languages=" option.
Before a fixed (and well tested) gpc INSTALL doc is released, I use the following work around.
- build GCC without "--enable-languages" option. And make install. This
does not build GPC. 2. backup the install-dir to a tar ball 3. build GPC with "--enable-languages=pascal" option. And make install. This build GPC with a "defective" GCC as by-product. Make Install. 4. restore the tar ball from step 2 back to the install-dir. This will over-write the "defective" GCC with the original good copy.
I tried this procedure with Cygwin. 'make bootstrap' produced both a GPC and a GCC compiler (taking 2 hours and eating 100mb of my hard disk in the process). Is this how it is supposed to behave?
Best regards, The Chief -------- Dr. Abimbola A. Olowofoyeku (The African Chief) Email: laa12@keele.ac.uk Homepage: http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/African_Chief/ Author of: Chief's Installer Pro v5.20a for Win32 ftp://ftp.demon.co.uk/pub/ibmpc/win95/apps/chief32/chief52a.zip
On Fri, 5 Nov 1999, Dr A Olowofoyeku wrote:
On 4 Nov 99, at 10:15, Mason Ip wrote:
[...]
The gcc-2.95.x/install/* did mention that if you use the "--enable-languages=" option, "make bootstrap" won't work.
Where? As I read it (in configure.html and build.html) --enable-languages= is the ONLY thing that works in gcc-2.95.x. `make LANGUAGES=<xxx>' that used to work (egcs-1.1.2 and earlier) might not work because not all languages are configured.
The essence is that in gcc-2.95.x you have to choose which languages to build compilers for when you run `configure', not when you run `make'.
[...]
I tried this procedure with Cygwin. 'make bootstrap' produced both a GPC and a GCC compiler (taking 2 hours and eating 100mb of my hard disk in the process). Is this how it is supposed to behave?
Yes.