On Sat, Jan 16, 2016 at 8:36 AM, Tim Tassonis <[email protected]> wrote: > As "we" initially define our own target as > > LFS_TGT=$(uname -m)-lfs-linux-gnu > > wouldn't it be nicer to set this target here accordingly, as: > > ../gcc-5.3.0/configure \ > --prefix=/usr \ > --target=$LFS_TGT \ > --enable-languages=c,c++ \ > --disable-multilib \ > --disable-bootstrap \ > --with-system-zlib > > > , resulting in a gcc with files containing x86_64-lfs-linux-gnu instead of > x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu ? > > > Or am I missing something that makes this a bad idea?
First of all, unless you're building a cross-compiler, you shouldn't be specifying --target; you should use --build=$LFS_TGT instead if you really want to adjust the full compiler names. (Same goes for binutils. It would also work to specify all three explicitly: --build=$LFS_TGT --host=$LFS_TGT --target=$LFS_TGT .) Also, according to this from 4.4, LFS_TGT is meant to be just for the intermediate tools and the final compiler build is intentionally left to use the default name: The LFS_TGT variable sets a non-default, but compatible machine description for use when building our cross compiler and linker and when cross compiling our temporary toolchain. More information is contained in Section 5.2, “Toolchain Technical Notes”. -- Daniel Schepler -- http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/lfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
