Re: a separate build of libc

[Thor Lancelot Simon <tls%panix.com@localhost>]

On Sat, Sep 20, 2014 at 01:03:05PM +0200, u-6hol%aetey.se@localhost wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 19, 2014 at 08:10:31PM -0400, Thor Lancelot Simon wrote:
> > On Fri, Sep 19, 2014 at 04:04:34PM +0200, u-6hol%aetey.se@localhost wrote:
> > > Background:
> > > 
> > >   building an independent/standalone toolchain able to produce binaries
> > >   runnable on NetBSD
> > 
> > Why don't you just run "build.sh -m <machine> tools" and use the result?
> 
> Because I aim to be able to rebuild the tools without having
> everything needed/assumed by "build.sh".
> 
> The intention is to have an independent and self-contained toolchain, to
> avoid any explicit or implicit restrictions/assumptions of the existing
> building routines.

I don't understand.  You will work very, very hard to construct a cross
build framework as robust as build.sh, and why?  Because you think there
might be some "restrictions/assumptions" nobody might have noticed or
be willing to fix?

If you tell build.sh to build the tools, that's all it does: build an
independent and self-contained toolchain.  Everything you need ends up
in the tooldir.  No need to build any other parts of NetBSD.

Why duplicate effort?

Thor