This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: fatal error: gnu/stubs-32.h: No such file
- From: David Starner <prosfilaes at gmail dot com>
- To: Jonathan Wakely <jwakely dot gcc at gmail dot com>
- Cc: "gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org" <gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- Date: Sat, 27 Jul 2013 16:10:30 -0700
- Subject: Re: fatal error: gnu/stubs-32.h: No such file
- References: <CAMZ=zj40GLLXB0toTGhpJihm--eMYMd643SOVGcPUg+LpRuZ8g at mail dot gmail dot com> <51EF8D98 dot 3060005 at redhat dot com> <CAMZ=zj67PA=yYGnkCZmG3Yet45r5=f=HvWcu6p_v2VgNfo--4w at mail dot gmail dot com> <51EFB70C dot 3050309 at redhat dot com> <CAAiZkiB6azOhjG1KwEMTSkJRga=6ONL63HW5q23nxCgSahFaNQ at mail dot gmail dot com> <51EFDA52 dot 8000903 at redhat dot com> <CAAiZkiBMmLGrYgb0kE2CSCJnpRtRa3ZBa1x+2jVVpBjaAZnozQ at mail dot gmail dot com> <51EFF7AE dot 8070301 at redhat dot com> <CAMZ=zj7wQ0ELaYZezrYcgaFrYD-2_5yRUDpxeYh6p59ypi4nCw at mail dot gmail dot com> <51F0DF1F dot 80207 at redhat dot com> <CAMZ=zj6hVKDWLuatcrOLYOiVxKhfjJ=+8wvEn0kgjGBEoi-ENw at mail dot gmail dot com> <51F23ADC dot 5080905 at redhat dot com> <CAMZ=zj7bbLavRh_3twVmoc-TUa20GniA9zWBOXaMFQu2iwKUHQ at mail dot gmail dot com> <CAH6eHdRf0vShSv3MF8fta=iPXyz9rSCuBtoo5C8-TBGAC4hSMQ at mail dot gmail dot com>
On Sat, Jul 27, 2013 at 12:23 PM, Jonathan Wakely <jwakely.gcc@gmail.com> wrote:
> It's not "some random package" it's the C library, and it is needed to
> compile 32-bit C programs.
It's not libc6. It's not even libc6-dev. It's libc6-dev-i386. Debian
Popularity Contest says that 84315 out of 147631 are AMD64; 99980
systems out of 147631 have libc6-dev installed; and yet only 7712
(presumably all AMD64) have libc6-dev-i386 installed (+740 with the
obsolete ia32-libs-dev). Any way I cut it, most people who have the C
library development package on AMD64 installed don't have the
libc6-dev-i386 package installed.
> If the
> latter, did you try spelling it correctly, --disable-multilib
> (singular)?
I'm sorry, I didn't realize I was misspelling it. Again, failing with
some random bug in the middle of compilation is not generally a sign
of that type of error.
> In any case, the point stands: someone needs to do the work, insisting
> on it being done doesn't do it.
That's not the point. I can send you a patch pretty quickly that
changes the default on AMD64 from --enable-multilib to
--disable-multilib. I've been told it's impossible to fix it any other
way, and saying "It is clearly a computable problem" is quite a
distance from saying "oh, we can fix this". If you can fix this
without changing the default, that's great, but nobody has even said
that's a solvable problem, except in the theoretical sense. I don't
care how it's fixed, but if you want me to do it, I'm going to make
the simple configuration fix instead of the possibly intractable
library detect patch.
--
Kie ekzistas vivo, ekzistas espero.