sm-discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org
Subject: Public SourceMage Discussion List
List archive
- From: Arwed von Merkatz <v.merkatz AT gmx.net>
- To: sm-discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org
- Subject: Re: [SM-Discuss] split gcc spells
- Date: Wed, 7 Jul 2004 21:43:59 +0200
On Tue, Jul 06, 2004 at 07:45:43PM +0200, Arwed von Merkatz wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 06, 2004 at 10:52:26AM +0200, Arwed von Merkatz wrote:
> [...]
> > Just submitted all of them to devel (except for gcj, needs another test
> > cast to finish first). gcc now installs only the C compiler and the gcc
> > base stuff, the others (g++, g77, gcj, objc) install their respective
> > compilers and runtimes and register themselves with gcc, so it's
> > possible (as with a single gcc spell) to run gcc to compile all
> > installed languages.
> > The way the gcc build system works this makes compilation of all
> > compilers together take a little bit longer than when they were in one
> > spell (expect about a 50% increase in needed time), but I think the
> > added flexibility is worth that. Especially since you only have to cast
> > objc now if you want the Objective-C compiler instead of recompiling the
> > whole compiler collection.
> [...]
>
> Just thought i'd give out a warning, i just noticed that libstdc++
> headers are broken. I can compile c++ programs as long as they don't use
> the STL, the libstdc++ binary is fine, but compiling c++ stuff that uses
> the standard library fails (sometimes, mjpegtools for example works).
>
> I haven't figured out yet why it broke, currently recasting g++ to see
> if it makes a difference. It could be caused by the glibc update, gcc
> 3.4.1 or by the split spells as far as i can tell.
The problems were caused by some stuff that happens if you compile both
c and c++ together but can't be represented exactly in a spec file. I
think I found a workaround, current g++ spell should work now.
--
Arwed v. Merkatz Source Mage GNU/Linux developer
http://www.sourcemage.org
-
[SM-Discuss] split gcc spells,
Arwed von Merkatz, 07/06/2004
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] split gcc spells,
Andrew, 07/06/2004
- Re: [SM-Discuss] split gcc spells, Arwed von Merkatz, 07/06/2004
- Re: [SM-Discuss] split gcc spells, Eric Sandall, 07/06/2004
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] split gcc spells,
Arwed von Merkatz, 07/06/2004
- Re: [SM-Discuss] split gcc spells, Arwed von Merkatz, 07/07/2004
- <Possible follow-up(s)>
-
[SM-Discuss] split gcc spells,
Arwed von Merkatz, 07/07/2004
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] split gcc spells,
Arwed von Merkatz, 07/08/2004
- Re: [SM-Discuss] split gcc spells, Eric Sandall, 07/08/2004
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] split gcc spells,
Eric Sandall, 07/08/2004
- Re: [SM-Discuss] split gcc spells, Arwed von Merkatz, 07/08/2004
-
[SM-Discuss] Re: split gcc spells,
Treeve Jelbert, 07/08/2004
- Re: [SM-Discuss] Re: split gcc spells, Arwed von Merkatz, 07/08/2004
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] split gcc spells,
Arwed von Merkatz, 07/08/2004
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] split gcc spells,
Andrew, 07/06/2004
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.