http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45508
--- Comment #7 from Nicolai Stange nicolai.stange at zmaw dot de 2010-10-04
19:05:30 UTC ---
libgomp, libgcc and libssp are the shared libs of gcc.
(actually the correct libstdc++ and libgfortran are also found if the correct
libgcc is found as
--- Comment #5 from nicolai dot stange at zmaw dot de 2010-09-04 19:31
---
(In reply to comment #4)
The problem with the configure is the libgcc specs are very target dependent.
Yes, and that's the reason why I think that others might benefit from those
configure-options.
Another
--- Comment #1 from nicolai dot stange at zmaw dot de 2010-09-02 19:49
---
Created an attachment (id=21678)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=21678action=view)
Adds --with-link-libgcc-specs to gcc-4.5.1/gcc/configure
Made against release 4.5.1
--
--- Comment #2 from pinskia at gmail dot com 2010-09-02 19:55 ---
Subject: Re: New: Does adding configure-options for specs-hardcoding make
sense?
You could use a small wrapper script that adds R option instead of a
specs file or adds the specs file to the command line.
On Sep 2,
--- Comment #3 from nicolai dot stange at zmaw dot de 2010-09-02 20:15
---
You could use a small wrapper script that adds R option instead of a
specs file or adds the specs file to the command line.
This would change nothing:
- The bootstrapping problem remains
- Whether I add a
--- Comment #4 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-09-02 22:28 ---
The problem with the configure is the libgcc specs are very target dependent.
Anyways I don't see the issue with using -R in a wrapper script and while
bootstrapping in LIB_CFLAGS=-R .
--
