On Wed, Feb 12, 2014 at 11:57 AM, Jakub Jelinek <ja...@redhat.com> wrote: > On Wed, Feb 12, 2014 at 11:52:47AM +0100, Richard Biener wrote: >> On Tue, Feb 11, 2014 at 5:17 PM, Jakub Jelinek <ja...@redhat.com> wrote: >> > On Fri, Jan 31, 2014 at 03:49:40PM +0100, Richard Biener wrote: >> >> On Fri, Jan 31, 2014 at 3:45 PM, FX <fxcoud...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> >> I've just seen that an explicit --enable-multilib is a way to do that. >> >> > >> >> > Yes, I was writing that as a reply when I received your email. (Also, >> >> > it's written in the configure error message.) >> >> >> >> Yeah - you know, that message is quite long and somehow I didn't read it >> >> carefully. I suspect that will happen to others, too, so we'll get some >> >> extra complaints from that ;) >> >> >> >> >> Btw, doing the configure check exactly after all-stage1-gcc should be >> >> >> an early enough and a serialization point, no? There you can do the >> >> >> check even for when cross-compiling. >> >> > >> >> > Well, you've already built a whole stage, so it's not so early, is it? >> >> >> >> Well, building the stage1 compiler is probably the fastest thing nowadays >> >> (it didn't yet build the target libraries for stage1 with the stage1, >> >> unoptimized >> >> and checking-enabled compiler - which is where it would fail in the odd >> >> way which is what you want to improve). >> >> >> >> As I said, you can't "properly" check it at the point you are checking. >> >> Which is why I complain - you're not checking this properly! >> >> >> >> Anyway, I've fixed the "bug" on our side with --enable-multilib. >> > >> > Just hit the same thing, while I have (in mock) 32-bit devel libc >> > installed, >> > I don't have 32-bit libgcc_s installed (what for, it will be built by gcc). >> > >> > Please revert it, or at least improve it (e.g. by trying to build >> > with -static-libgcc at least). >> >> I wouldn't have static 32bit libgcc installed either. > > So perhaps turn that into a check if preprocessing of #include <features.h> > works with -m32 (and never complain when building --with-sysroot*)? > I mean, if features.h doesn't preprocess successfully (because of missing > /usr/include/gnu/stubs-32.h), then as long as the compiler is going to > include the same headers and not some sysroot, multilib building would fail > in that case too.
That sounds good to me. Though it still wouldn't work with a non-multilib built host compiler (maybe detect that and just warn but not abort for that case?). Richard. > Jakub