[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [avr-gcc-list] no avr/lib/avr25/attiny13a/Makefile.in

From: Ruud Vlaming
Subject: Re: [avr-gcc-list] no avr/lib/avr25/attiny13a/Makefile.in
Date: Mon, 2 Feb 2009 09:33:43 +0100
User-agent: KMail/1.9.1

On Monday 02 February 2009 00:51, Timo Sandmann wrote:
> Am 01.02.2009 um 23:46 schrieb Ruud Vlaming:
> >> Users are supposed to download the official releases here:
> >> <http://download.savannah.gnu.org/releases-noredirect/avr-libc/>
> >> and use those. Then they don't need to bootstrap.
> > Well i downloaded that file in my toolchainbuilder, and discovered
> > it gives the error in the build process when you don't bootstrap,
> > like this:
> >
> >  cd avr-libc-1.6.4-build
> >  ../avr-libc-1.6.4/configure --prefix=$SOMEDIR --build=`../avr- 
> > libc-1.6.4/config.guess` --host=avr
> >  make && make install
> >
> >  config.status: error: cannot find input file: avr/lib/avr25/ 
> > attiny13a/Makefile.in
> I guess you applied the patch "40-avr-libc-1.6.4-fix-attiny13a- 
> arch.patch"? With this patch I need to use bootstrap (because the  
> patch moves the attiny13a from avr2 to avr25), without it the avr-libc  
> builds fine here without bootstrap.
I do. So the point is, when you apply a patch, then there is / may be
a need to bootstrap? Can this also hold true for other tools? I for
example never did so and experienced no problems until now.

> BTW: For me as a user it's even worse to build binutils with all the  
> patches from winavr, because AFAIK the autoconf / autoheader version  
> has to be exactly 2.59, not newer.
Can you be more specific? Is far as i know i apply all patches and did not
encounter this problem. From the present discussion you may have
understood that the version has to be 2.59<=version<=2.62. But that
point is addressed by a patch now (use mine or Eric's). What's the 
source of limitation?


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]