Library dependencies missing: stdlibs in directory

Emanuel Berg emanuel.berg.8573 at
Mon Feb 17 22:49:25 CET 2014

Adam Lackorzynski <adam at> writes:

> In a couple of sentences? Give me a try.

No, actually I thought it was perhaps much to ask,
that's what I meant. As for me, if you don't mind
writing several pages, that would be great :)

> When you compile a program on your desktop, you need
> quite a bit of support functionality, such as some
> libraries, linker scripts etc.  Those you just
> install and then it works.  If you want to compile a
> program for another OS you this need support
> functionality as well. And that's what you have
> built.

So building (compiling and linking + some extra glue)
is that "OS intense" even with the same compiler (and
associated tools), the same language, and, not the
least, on the same architecture?

Also, is the "support functionality" persistent (not
application/source dependent), i.e., will the process
be much faster the next time I do it? (Actually I'll
try this in one second, but I ask anyway.)

What is the rationale for all those trees with
Makefiles on each level, not seeming to do much (to the
untrained eye, though I know the syntax) while
sometimes they are *immense*?

Except for the usual stuff (target, libraries, and
sources), there are a couple of recurring things, like

include $(L4DIR)/mk/

(and more) that perhaps would make more sense (to me)
if you could provide me with a "hit list" what must be
done to build an application. If I know "what" must be
done, I think I could identify the "how" by just
looking at other Makefiles.

underground experts united:

More information about the l4-hackers mailing list