Re: Exhaustive Instructions for Toolchain Generation

2017-10-05 Thread Sandra Loosemore
On 10/05/2017 03:52 PM, Jonathan Wakely wrote: Maybe it's best if this thread is allowed to die. Yes, thank you. :-) -Sandra

Re: Exhaustive Instructions for Toolchain Generation

2017-10-05 Thread Jonathan Wakely
On 5 October 2017 at 22:11, Sandra Loosemore wrote: > On 10/05/2017 02:16 PM, R0b0t1 wrote: > >> I find it hard to care about someone's position or affiliation but >> instead choose to care about what they do and how they act. If it was >> Sandra's intent to ask me for free work, then I am not

Re: Exhaustive Instructions for Toolchain Generation

2017-10-05 Thread Sandra Loosemore
On 10/05/2017 02:16 PM, R0b0t1 wrote: I find it hard to care about someone's position or affiliation but instead choose to care about what they do and how they act. If it was Sandra's intent to ask me for free work, then I am not sure how that qualifies as "the right thing." Per my latest

Re: Exhaustive Instructions for Toolchain Generation

2017-10-05 Thread carl hansen
toolchain problems? If you really want to learn , try linuxfromscratch.org and http://trac.clfs.org/ Cross linux from scratch You complained about too much documentation, and here's some more.

Re: Exhaustive Instructions for Toolchain Generation

2017-10-05 Thread R0b0t1
I apologize for the series of emails, but having stitched many responses together before, the series is easier. This is a response to the conversation started by noloader. I appreciate the empathy he had for my question, as that is what led me to ask it (I have also had the exact same issues

Re: Exhaustive Instructions for Toolchain Generation

2017-10-05 Thread David Brown
On 05/10/17 22:16, R0b0t1 wrote: On Wed, Oct 4, 2017 at 3:33 AM, David Brown wrote: R0b0t1, you might not realise this but CodeSoucery is a major contributor to gcc and other gnu tools. Individuals and companies pay them for their services - to put together tested,

Re: Exhaustive Instructions for Toolchain Generation

2017-10-05 Thread R0b0t1
On Wed, Oct 4, 2017 at 5:34 AM, Jonathan Wakely wrote: > On 3 October 2017 at 22:27, R0b0t1 wrote: >> I decline to do your company's market research for them. They could choose >> to pay me, of course. Based on the failures I am experiencing I doubt that >> your company has

Re: Exhaustive Instructions for Toolchain Generation

2017-10-05 Thread R0b0t1
On Wed, Oct 4, 2017 at 3:33 AM, David Brown wrote: > > R0b0t1, you might not realise this but CodeSoucery is a major > contributor to gcc and other gnu tools. Individuals and companies pay > them for their services - to put together tested, qualified and > documented

Re: Exhaustive Instructions for Toolchain Generation

2017-10-05 Thread R0b0t1
On Tue, Oct 3, 2017 at 6:22 PM, Sandra Loosemore wrote: > On 10/03/2017 03:27 PM, R0b0t1 wrote: >> >> On Sun, Oct 1, 2017 at 4:35 PM, Sandra Loosemore >> > wrote: > > > [snip] > > FAOD, R0b0t1 forwarded mail I

Re: Exhaustive Instructions for Toolchain Generation

2017-10-04 Thread Manuel López-Ibáñez
On 4 Oct 2017 8:01 pm, "Nathan Sidwell" wrote: On 10/04/2017 02:10 PM, Manuel López-Ibáñez wrote: Incidentally, I don't understand why there is no "Professional Support" > page where we can direct people to find professional support. It could > My recollection is that the FSF

Re: Exhaustive Instructions for Toolchain Generation

2017-10-04 Thread Nathan Sidwell
On 10/04/2017 02:10 PM, Manuel López-Ibáñez wrote: Incidentally, I don't understand why there is no "Professional Support" page where we can direct people to find professional support. It could My recollection is that the FSF explicitly prohibit this. nathan -- Nathan Sidwell

Re: Exhaustive Instructions for Toolchain Generation

2017-10-04 Thread Manuel López-Ibáñez
On 04/10/17 00:22, Sandra Loosemore wrote: On 10/03/2017 03:27 PM, R0b0t1 wrote: On Sun, Oct 1, 2017 at 4:35 PM, Sandra Loosemore > wrote: [snip] FAOD, R0b0t1 forwarded mail I deliberately sent off-list back to the list.  I do know

Re: Exhaustive Instructions for Toolchain Generation

2017-10-04 Thread Jonathan Wakely
On 4 October 2017 at 17:45, Jeffrey Walton wrote: For completeness, GCC has a wiki. But I still don't have an account to make an occasional update; and I still don't know how to get an account. I tried to get one in the past but the process was broken so I gave up. >>> >>> 1)

Re: Exhaustive Instructions for Toolchain Generation

2017-10-04 Thread Jeffrey Walton
>>> For completeness, GCC has a wiki. But I still don't have an account to >>> make an occasional update; and I still don't know how to get an >>> account. I tried to get one in the past but the process was broken so >>> I gave up. >> >> 1) create an account >> 2) get your username added to the

Re: Exhaustive Instructions for Toolchain Generation

2017-10-04 Thread Jonathan Wakely
On 4 October 2017 at 17:25, Jonathan Wakely wrote: > On 4 October 2017 at 17:14, Jeffrey Walton wrote: >> Maybe some of the first steps is to (1) recognize the information >> management problem, and (2) provide information dissemination that's >> {amicable|consistent|?} with what's occurring in

Re: Exhaustive Instructions for Toolchain Generation

2017-10-04 Thread Jonathan Wakely
On 4 October 2017 at 17:14, Jeffrey Walton wrote: > Maybe some of the first steps is to (1) recognize the information > management problem, and (2) provide information dissemination that's > {amicable|consistent|?} with what's occurring in 2017. I mean, What does that mean in concrete terms? >

Re: Exhaustive Instructions for Toolchain Generation

2017-10-04 Thread Joseph Myers
On Wed, 4 Oct 2017, Jeffrey Walton wrote: > Of the thousands of hits when searching for the information on a task > like compiling GCC, there's probably a handful of good sources. > Everything else is just crap on the web that someone decided to blog > about. (This is speaking from experience).

Re: Exhaustive Instructions for Toolchain Generation

2017-10-04 Thread Jeffrey Walton
On Wed, Oct 4, 2017 at 11:25 AM, Joseph Myers wrote: > There are over 25000 words of GCC installation documentation in > install.texi, and that's not even including e.g. libstdc++ configure > options documented elsewhere. Other toolchain components also have such >

Re: Exhaustive Instructions for Toolchain Generation

2017-10-04 Thread Joseph Myers
There are over 25000 words of GCC installation documentation in install.texi, and that's not even including e.g. libstdc++ configure options documented elsewhere. Other toolchain components also have such documentation. It's true that, as a consequence of the toolchain being made up of

Re: Exhaustive Instructions for Toolchain Generation

2017-10-04 Thread Nathan Sidwell
On 10/04/2017 06:34 AM, Jonathan Wakely wrote: On 3 October 2017 at 22:27, R0b0t1 wrote: I decline to do your company's market research for them. They could choose to pay me, of course. Based on the failures I am experiencing I doubt that your company has gotten the build process entirely

Re: Exhaustive Instructions for Toolchain Generation

2017-10-04 Thread Jonathan Wakely
On 3 October 2017 at 22:27, R0b0t1 wrote: > I decline to do your company's market research for them. They could choose > to pay me, of course. Based on the failures I am experiencing I doubt that > your company has gotten the build process entirely correct. Given that you apparently only recently

Re: Exhaustive Instructions for Toolchain Generation

2017-10-04 Thread David Brown
On 03/10/17 23:27, R0b0t1 wrote: > On Sun, Oct 1, 2017 at 4:35 PM, Sandra Loosemore > wrote: >> On 09/26/2017 03:05 PM, R0b0t1 wrote: >>> Is there anything else I should be aware of? >> >> >> Yes, there are companies (like, ahem, the one I work for -- >>

Re: Exhaustive Instructions for Toolchain Generation

2017-10-03 Thread Sandra Loosemore
On 10/03/2017 03:27 PM, R0b0t1 wrote: On Sun, Oct 1, 2017 at 4:35 PM, Sandra Loosemore > wrote: [snip] FAOD, R0b0t1 forwarded mail I deliberately sent off-list back to the list. I do know that business solicitations are frowned upon

Re: Exhaustive Instructions for Toolchain Generation

2017-10-03 Thread R0b0t1
On Sun, Oct 1, 2017 at 4:35 PM, Sandra Loosemore wrote: > On 09/26/2017 03:05 PM, R0b0t1 wrote: >> >> Hello, >> >> I am having problems understanding the build instructions for GCC. I >> can almost always produce toolchains which function but I can find >> programs or

Re: Exhaustive Instructions for Toolchain Generation

2017-09-27 Thread R0b0t1
On Wed, Sep 27, 2017 at 12:34 AM, Jonathan Wakely wrote: > On 27 September 2017 at 05:49, R0b0t1 wrote: >> On Tue, Sep 26, 2017 at 4:30 PM, Jonathan Wakely >> wrote: >>> On 26 September 2017 at 22:05, R0b0t1

Re: Exhaustive Instructions for Toolchain Generation

2017-09-27 Thread R0b0t1
On Wed, Sep 27, 2017 at 12:34 AM, Jonathan Wakely wrote: > On 27 September 2017 at 05:49, R0b0t1 wrote: >> On Tue, Sep 26, 2017 at 4:30 PM, Jonathan Wakely >> wrote: >>> On 26 September 2017 at 22:05, R0b0t1

Re: Exhaustive Instructions for Toolchain Generation

2017-09-26 Thread Jonathan Wakely
On 27 September 2017 at 05:49, R0b0t1 wrote: > On Tue, Sep 26, 2017 at 4:30 PM, Jonathan Wakely > wrote: >> On 26 September 2017 at 22:05, R0b0t1 wrote: >>> Hello, >>> >>> I am having problems understanding the build instructions for

Re: Exhaustive Instructions for Toolchain Generation

2017-09-26 Thread R0b0t1
On Tue, Sep 26, 2017 at 4:30 PM, Jonathan Wakely wrote: > On 26 September 2017 at 22:05, R0b0t1 wrote: >> Hello, >> >> I am having problems understanding the build instructions for GCC. I >> can almost always produce toolchains which function but I can

Re: Exhaustive Instructions for Toolchain Generation

2017-09-26 Thread Jonathan Wakely
On 26 September 2017 at 22:05, R0b0t1 wrote: > Hello, > > I am having problems understanding the build instructions for GCC. I > can almost always produce toolchains which function but I can find > programs or scripts which do more or less the same thing that produce >

Exhaustive Instructions for Toolchain Generation

2017-09-26 Thread R0b0t1
Hello, I am having problems understanding the build instructions for GCC. I can almost always produce toolchains which function but I can find programs or scripts which do more or less the same thing that produce nonfunctional toolchains or which abort at some stage of compilation. (To clarify: I