/home/build/linaro/32bit/./gcc/as: line 106: exec: -m: invalid option> > exec: usage: exec [-cl] [-a name] [command [arguments ...]] [redirection> > ...]
The libgcc config.log is the right one to look at. The error is here,> when gcc calls the assembler, the assembler gives an error. So> something is wrong here. You need to configure, build, and install> binutils before you configure and build gcc, using the same configure> options for binutils and gcc.
The whole cross-architecture situation complicates things...in particular I'm wondering "which" binutils (host versus target sysroot) we are talking about? I'm trying to figure out if the missing binutils is from the armhf sysroot or from the x86_64 host I'm building on. There is an armhf binutils-dev package on the armhf build sysroot, and binutils-dev package on the aarch64 build sysroot (both the armhf and aarch64 sysroots include everything needed to build, link, and develop for their particular architecuture on the systems they were cloned from).
The x86_64 host has native packages for everything, but in a few cases has some cross-architecture packages. "as" is missing according to the config.log, but the assembler is present for native x86_64 and aarch64 cross-assembling. Would it be correct that the missing packages are cross-architecture armhf needing to be installed on the x86_64 host, and that build sysroot is unrelated to the missing package? It seems I probably need x86_64 host binutils cross-assembling to armhf.
To look at this a bit more, you can cd into the gcc build dir and try > touch tmp.c> ./xgcc -B./ -v tmp.c> which will show the options passed to the assembler, and what> assembler binary is being used.
You probably also want to look at the as file in the gcc build dir,> which should be a shell script pointing at the installed assembler.> This shell script is created at gcc configure time.
Jim
I did create an empty tmp.c in the gcc directory, and it seems "as" just doesn't exist according the test. It isn't a case of seeing "as" being called and complaining about something, the case is that the shell script found no assembler at all (there are assemblers on this host, just not armhf, so presumably I have to conclude that this supports the idea of needing a cross-binutils which is armhf on my x86_64 host, and not just in build sysroot).
If I need to build cross-binutils and such, is there any reason to not use pre-compiled binaries from Linaro 5.2 or 5.3 tool chains?
Thanks!