Public SourceMage Discussion List

[Robin Cook <rcook AT wyrms.net>]

So is it better to apply the glibc patch or use the compile switch? 
Will the switch cause other issues later on? Will the patch be in the
next release of glibc?

CuZnDragon
Robin Cook

On Thu, 2003-06-19 at 06:09, Hamish Greig wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
> 
> On Sun, 15 Jun 2003 11:52, Eric Sandall wrote:
> > Has anyone tried gcc 3.3 yet?  I have, and it seems to break glibc 2.3.2
> > (some 'sscanf' error), can anyone refute or validate this?  I've gotten
> > this error on two of my machines (installed from 0.6 beta3 ISO, which has
> > it's own glibc/gcc problem).
> >
> > -sandalle
> there is a patch for this
> but i have found that my latest submission to p4 for a gcc ./configure 
> switch 
> has stopped this error on this machine.
> I attach the patch in case it is needed but i recommend rebuilding gcc3.3 
> using 
> - --enable-__cxa_atexit
> which forces c++ ABI compatibility compliance.
> Hamish
> - -- 
> Do You SMuGL!?
> Linux so advanced it may as well be magic!
> Everything you'll ever need on one web page
> http://www.sourcemage.org/
> +++++++++++++++++++++++++
> Defenestrate yourself! Free yourself from Redmond!
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.2.2 (GNU/Linux)
> 
> iD8DBQE+8Znq8fSufZR6424RAiS4AKCJ9BSTde57o/RVifaKaOfaFN8HXQCfYWN6
> Ea5LZArKNKcjgYqfKshQttM=
> =SOxs
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
> 
> ______________________________________________________________________
> _______________________________________________
> SM-Discuss mailing list
> SM-Discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/sm-discuss