On Mon, Jun 04, 2001 at 02:07:41AM -0400, Ben Collins wrote: > On Sun, Jun 03, 2001 at 04:19:21PM -0500, Gordon Sadler wrote: > > I've conducted some tests building glibc-2.2.3+nis patch with gcc-2.95-4 > > from Debian unstable and some local builds of gcc-3.0. After reading > > some archives of the glibc mailing lists, I discovered some oddities on > > the build process. > (...) > > So testing released builds of glibc is not very worthwhile for checking > > the integrity of gcc-3.0 until glibc is updated -(. > > Interesting considering I've done many glibc builds with gcc-3.0. In > fact, every sparc glibc builds uses gcc-3.0 to builds the 64bit libs. > > Are you exporting CC=gcc-3.0?
Now that I've looked at this, it appears to be a gcc-3.0 bug, not glibc. Gcc-3.0 need to search for the correct binary. Currently gcc-3's cpp is called cpp0. Maybe there needs to be a default symlink in gcc-3's binary directory to point cpp -> cpp0. Ben -- -----------=======-=-======-=========-----------=====------------=-=------ / Ben Collins -- ...on that fantastic voyage... -- Debian GNU/Linux \ ` [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] ' `---=========------=======-------------=-=-----=-===-======-------=--=---'
