On Sat, May 26, 2007 at 12:31:53PM +0200, Carsten Clever wrote: > > > > But isn't r3521 the current head (in other words, NOT 1.0.0) ? If > > that is true, definitely drop -fPIC and expect some breakage from > > gcc-4.2.0. > You're right. Should have written CLFS-Development-1.0.x-SVN-r3521 (current > head). I'll stay with -fPIC anyway. > Please read http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31490 - particularly comments 5 and 7. The patch in comment 9 appears to solve that problem, but I had to apply it by hand (looks as if it wasn't created against the 4.2.0 release, the line numbers are very different). I seem to remember some things on my desktop need -fPIC with x86_64-64, so it is possible (but not certain) that vanilla 4.2.0 isn't good enough. Joe also mentioned something about xorg on -dev.
ĸen -- das eine Mal als Tragödie, das andere Mal als Farce _______________________________________________ Clfs-support mailing list [email protected] http://lists.cross-lfs.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/clfs-support
