This is the mail archive of the
gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
[Bug bootstrap/26892] Can't compile a 64-bit gcc
- From: "lucier at math dot purdue dot edu" <gcc-bugzilla at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- To: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: 31 Mar 2006 03:01:33 -0000
- Subject: [Bug bootstrap/26892] Can't compile a 64-bit gcc
- References: <bug-26892-271@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
- Reply-to: gcc-bugzilla at gcc dot gnu dot org
------- Comment #2 from lucier at math dot purdue dot edu 2006-03-31 03:01 -------
Subject: Re: Can't compile a 64-bit gcc
I don't know.
Why does 4.2 use libiconv and 4.1 not use it? (I'm presuming that 4.1
doesn't use it because I was able to build a 64-bit gcc on darwin).
Should gcc ship libiconv source and compile it using BOOTCFLAGS, like
it ends up doing with libiberty?
Brad
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26892