Mail Archives: djgpp/1999/09/22/06:30:33
On Tue, 21 Sep 1999 21:02:36 +0100, Alex Crowther
<mr_spod AT hotmail DOT com> wrote:
>..
>or put another way, you are trying to compile gcc (a compiler) because you
>need a compiler, however you need a compiler to compile the compiler, and
>hense it wont compile :P
Umm, no, that's not what I'm doing. I already have the gcc binaries
installed, and they work fine.
>If you do already have a C compiler then the makefile is either a: Pants,
>b: badly written, or c: configured for a different version of make.exe and
>is hense not compatible.
Doesn't sound likely. a) well it must work for other people b) [and
again] c) not likely, I'm using GNU make.
>
>Things to check are that a: make is being found,
Yes, it's being run, hence the contents of stage1.log
> b: its being run in the
>same
>dir as the MakeFile,
Well it should be - I'm using the provided batch file, which is meant
to do everything for me. Most of these issues you are pointing out,
well, shouldn't be issues.
> c: the stuff in the makefile makes sense, eg it doesnt
As I said, the Makefile did look weird - no targets specified. But it
is a generated makefile, using Makefile.in as a template. Perhaps this
is the step that is going wrong? I still wouldn't have a clue how to
fix it though.
>
>say things like
>
>CC=Insert Your Compiler Here
>
>etc etc,
Nothing like that.
>Hope thats of some help
>
>Lestat
Well, thanks for trying.
Davin.
__________________________________________________________
*** davmac - sharkin'!! davmac AT iname DOT com ***
my programming page: http://yoyo.cc.monash.edu.au/~davmac/
- Raw text -