On 12/02/2018 13:45, René Nyffenegger wrote:
> I am following the "current stable" version according to "Read Online"
> I am trying to build LFS on Ubuntu 17.10, 64 Bit Intel.
> On 12.02.2018 12:28, Pierre Labastie wrote:
>> On 12/02/2018 11:34, René Nyffenegger wrote:
>>> In Step 6.9
>>> (http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/view/stable/chapter06/glibc.html) I get
>>> the following error when I run the ../configure script:
>>> checking whether to use .ctors/.dtors header and trailer... configure:
>>> error: missing __attribute__ ((constructor)) support??
>>> This was already discussed on the mailing list:
>>> Apparently, adding
>>> to the invocation of the configure script helped.
>>> I am not sure in which step I should add this configre-setting: step 6.9,
>>> step 5.7 or another step?
>>> Also, I am wondering if this bug(?) has not been fixed in the meantime.
>> Which version of the book, on which system, and which distro? With recent
>> versions of glibc, adding libc_cv_ctors_header=yes should not be needed, at
>> least on x86. But when it used to be needed, it was in chapter 5 glibc.
Please do not top post. According to what you say, there should be no need to
add libc_cv_ctors_header=yes. Looking at my logs, I have, during the configure
checking whether to use .ctors/.dtors header and trailer... no
in both chapter 5 and chapter 6 glibc, and my build went smoothly.
There was a thread in last September about the same issue, and the OP had the
following in configure:
checking for .set assembler directive... no
checking linker support for protected data symbol... no
while I have 'yes' to these 2 items. What do you have (it's just a few lines
before configure stops)? Can you also check in chapter 5?
If there is a no, I guess you'll have to start again chapter 5. Or maybe you
just missed some symlink (section 6.6)...
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?
Q: What is the most annoying thing in e-mail?