On Fri, 7 Oct 2005, Luca wrote:
On the host gcc version is 3.3.5 but in Cross-LFS you compile it just after
glibc-headers. Well, I think I will install gcc-4.0.2 on the host in opt.
Luca
Oh, thanks for putting me straight :) I'm ambivalent about whether the
glibc headers are needed on the architectures I have, but so far I
haven't got round to testing x86_64.
I was going to offer you the following hack (untested) which tests the
cross-compiler instead of the native compiler. Of course, it's possible
that something about installing the headers will actually need gcc-3.4
or newer on the host, you never can tell with glibc.
FWIW, the documentation still refers to gcc-3.2 or newer.
Ken
--- glibc-20050926/configure.orig 2005-10-07 16:14:01.000000000 +0100
+++ glibc-20050926/configure 2005-10-07 16:21:27.000000000 +0100
@@ -4111,9 +4111,9 @@ if test -z "$CC"; then
ac_verc_fail=yes
else
# Found it, now check the version.
- echo "$as_me:$LINENO: checking version of $CC" >&5
-echo $ECHO_N "checking version of $CC... $ECHO_C" >&6
- ac_prog_version=`$CC -v 2>&1 | sed -n 's/^.*version
\([egcygnustpi-]*[0-9.]*\).*$/\1/p'`
+ echo "$as_me:$LINENO: checking version of ${ac_tool_prefix}gcc" >&5
+echo $ECHO_N "checking version of ${ac_tool_prefix}gcc... $ECHO_C" >&6
+ ac_prog_version=`${ac_tool_prefix}gcc -v 2>&1 | sed -n 's/^.*version
\([egcygnustpi-]*[0-9.]*\).*$/\1/p'`
case $ac_prog_version in
'') ac_prog_version="v. ?.??, bad"; ac_verc_fail=yes;;
3.4* | 4.[0-9]* )
--
das eine Mal als Tragödie, das andere Mal als Farce
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
