If it's anything like the GCL+localbfd issues I ran into, I think it went something like this:
1) GCL relies on specific binutils versions, since binary incompatible changes are a requent event in the binutils world. 2) A number of linux distributions (the problem is especially noticable on something like Gentoo) will incorporate changes in bfd faster than GCL keeps up with them. 3) The safe answer on such systems is to build a copy of bfd that GCL knows how to deal with, specifically for GCL. This results in more overhead for GCL installs but I think disk space and CPU time are cheaper than programmer time, in this particular case. This email deals with a similar GCL problem (I don't think I was trying to build Axiom at that time): http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/gcl-devel/2002-10/msg00147.html There is also a discussion of the binutils problem on the debian lists: http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/gcl-devel/2004-08/msg00033.html Cheers, CY --- root <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > actually, no. i don't remember (thus, proving that documentation is > vital) why the locbfd was chosen. there was an issue that arose about > building GCL on FC3 which went on between Camm and I but I no longer > have the emails. it may be somewhere in the mailing list archives. > at this point it falls to superstition ("because it works"). > > t > > > _______________________________________________ > Axiom-developer mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/axiom-developer > __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com _______________________________________________ Axiom-developer mailing list [email protected] http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/axiom-developer
