Re: [avr-libc-dev] [bugs #10329] crtm168.o is not being built

[Keith Gudger]

I used a ./build directory, and everything worked fine.  In other gcc
related install info, it always suggests doing this.  The avr-libc INSTALL
did not, so silly me, I thought it wouldn't make any difference...

Thanks for the help.
Keith

On Thu, 7 Oct 2004, E. Weddington wrote:

> Keith Gudger wrote:
> 
> >Ted & Eric:
> >
> >I followed this thread because of a problem I found with avr-libc-1.0.4.
> >Hopefully you can tell me I'm all wet, but here's what happened:
> >
> >I got the avr-libc-1.0.4 tar, and built it.  Afterwords, the avr3, avr4,
> >and avr5 directories were no longer in my /usr/avr/lib directory, meaning
> >all of those devices were no longer supported.  My version of avr-gcc is:
> >
> >  
> >
> I've been seing some of that here. I haven't yet mentioned it on the 
> avr-libc list.
> 
> I have a "avr-libc/avr-libc-1.0.4" dir which contains the source. I 
> build in the "avr-libc/build" dir. The building process then creates:
> avr-libc/avr3
> avr-libc/avr4
> avr-libc/avr5
> that are parallel to the /build directory. I would have expected these 
> directories to be under /build.
> 
> But the good thing is that everything seems to build and install just 
> fine for me. This is one reason why I haven't mentioned this yet. But, I 
> could be the oddball here since I build on Cygwin. :-)
> 
> >avr-gcc (GCC) 3.3 20030428 (prerelease), which with binutils 2.13 should
> >be OK, no?  Thanks.
> >
> >  
> >
> Those versions are probably ok, but you might want to upgrade to a 
> *released* version of gcc, perhaps 3.3.2, and go to binutils 2.15. IMHO, 
> I would avoid using the 3.4.x series for the AVR target for the time 
> being due to regression bugs. Unless you like patching. :-)
> 
> Eric
>