On Mon, 28 Sep 2015 08:04:07 -0500 [email protected] wrote: > > I receive [Requesting program interpreter: > /tools/lib64/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2] after running the glibc sanity check > (5.7. Glibc-2.22 LFS 7.8-rc1). The documentation indicates the > /tools/lib64/ prefix is fine, but I should see ld-linux.so.2 for the > remainder. I included the following in Binutils-2.25.1 - Pass 1. > > case $(uname -m) in > x86_64) mkdir -v /tools/lib && ln -sv lib /tools/lib64 ;; > esac > > /lfs/tools/lib64 is linked to lib and > /lfs/tools/lib/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2 to ld-2.22.so. $LFS_TGT is > x86_64-lfs-linux-gnu. > > I'm compiling 7.8 on a box running LFS 7.7. I see no errors in > binutils/gcc pass 1 or with the API headers. > > If you have a 64-bit system, then that is the correct name for the linker.
-- If any members of GCHQ are reading this, shame on you! I fought for your right to belong to a trade union and now you are taking away my right to privacy? H Russman -- http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page Do not top post on this list. A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text. Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing? A: Top-posting. Q: What is the most annoying thing in e-mail? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style
