Re: GCC-3.0.1 can't compile Glibc-2.2.4

[william <william at zh dot t2-design dot com>]

"H . J . Lu" wrote:

> On Mon, Sep 24, 2001 at 11:25:22AM +0200, Paolo Carlini wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > [snip]
> >
> > >             What does  it mean?GCC-3.0.1 can't compile glibc-2.2.4
> >
> > No, it can't, unfortunately.
> > Neither 2.95.3 or any other officially releasead GCC is completely ok, for
> > that matter.
> > To the best of my knowldedge you may:
> > 1- Wait for the first 3.0.x/2.2.x couple certified as compatible (a couple
> > of months away?)
> > 2- Apply a couple of patches to 2.95.3 (see, f..i,
> > http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2001-06/msg01985.html ) or download a 2.95.4
> > snapshot (or wait for 2.95.4 itself)
> > 3- Use 2.96-RH
> >
> > (Personally, I chose 2- and everything went fine)
> >
> > If someone in the know (f.i., H.J. Lu, A. Jaeger, J. Jelinek) would like to
> > post an update on this obnoxious issue we  - the users of both those GNU
> > packages - would all be very grateful!
> >
>
> Jakub's change is almost ok to me. My only objection is dlopening
> libgcc_s.so.1. I don't think it should be included unless it has
> been verified to work as intended. But it seems noone has tested if
> it works when the ABI of libgcc_s.so.1 changes, which is the main
> purpose of dlopening libgcc_s.so.1, and someone believes the ABI change
> of libgcc_s.so.1 which dlopening libgcc_s.so.1 is trying to address is
> very unlikely to happen. Given those, I suggest
>
> 1. Check in Jakub's change, excluding dlopening libgcc_s.so.1. Do a
> proper dlopening libgcc_s.so.1 later when necessary. Or
> 2. Check if dlopening libgcc_s.so.1 works, then check in the patch
> with a working dlopening libgcc_s.so.1 scheme.
>
> H.J.

Hi,
        I check the patch against gcc-2.95.3,I'm wondering if it's only used for
i386 and alpha target.I wanted to get GCC-2.95.3 with those patch can work on
MIPS platform.Could it be available?
        Thanks for advance
            william 26/9/2001