This is the mail archive of the libstdc++@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the libstdc++ project.

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]

Re: CVS libstdc++ vs. binutils version?

To: libstdc++ at gcc dot gnu dot org
Subject: Re: CVS libstdc++ vs. binutils version?
From: Gabriel Dos Reis <gdr at codesourcery dot com>
Date: 05 Mar 2001 09:56:44 +0100
Organization: CodeSourcery, LLC
References: <Pine.SOL.3.91.1010304112538.26744A@taarna.cygnus.com> <m3itlpiatk.fsf@otr.mynet.cygnus.com> <flg0gtqoah.fsf@sel.cmla.ens-cachan.fr> <m3d7bxi8c3.fsf@otr.mynet.cygnus.com> <20010304155715.B10160@disaster.jaj.com> <20010304215847.A7902@shell7.ba.best.com>

Nathan Myers <ncm@nospam.cantrip.org> writes:

| I am starting to get back into building CVS versions of gcc and
| libstdc++, and am using Solaris 2.7.  Is binutils-2.10.1 good 

I don't think 2.10.1 is enought.  I use 2.10.90 on solaris-2.7.
And the configuiration line is a bit a black magic :-(
I used to say --with-gnu-as --with-gnu-ld, but MLMV.

-- Gaby
CodeSourcery, LLC                       http://www.codesourcery.com

References:
- Re: [patch RFC] cpp macro surgery
  - From: Benjamin Kosnik
- Re: [patch RFC] cpp macro surgery
  - From: Ulrich Drepper
- Re: [patch RFC] cpp macro surgery
  - From: Gabriel Dos Reis
- Re: [patch RFC] cpp macro surgery
  - From: Ulrich Drepper
- Re: [patch RFC] cpp macro surgery
  - From: Phil Edwards
- CVS libstdc++ vs. binutils version?
  - From: Nathan Myers

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]