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: Gabriel Dos Reis <gdr at integrable-solutions dot net>
- To: Jonathan Wakely <jwakely dot gcc at gmail dot com>
- Cc: David Starner <prosfilaes at gmail dot com>, Andrew Haley <aph at redhat dot com>, "gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org" <gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- Date: Sat, 27 Jul 2013 17:54:45 -0500
- 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 2:23 PM, Jonathan Wakely <jwakely.gcc@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 27 July 2013 14:56, David Starner wrote:
>> On Fri, Jul 26, 2013 at 2:01 AM, Andrew Haley <aph@redhat.com> wrote:
>>> GCC can detect at configure time that it will fail. It is clearly
>>> a computable problem. It's a matter of someone doing it rather than
>>> insisting that the world should change to suit them.
>>
>> GCC 4.8.1 will fail to compile on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu that has
>> all the programs that Prerequisites in the Installation instructions
>> lists. That I install some random package not needed to build C
>> programs is not listed as a prerequisite in the documentation.
>
> It's not "some random package" it's the C library, and it is needed to
> compile 32-bit C programs.
>
> The fact it's not listed as a prerequesite has already been pointed
> out as a problem with the docs.
Although that is an improvement, it is still far away from solving
the problem. I read all the arguments, it still looks wrong to me.
>
>> I don't
>> regard objecting to that is a matter of the world should change to
>> suit me, rather as GCC not compiling on a system that it lists as a
>> primary platform and is one of the most common targets for it. (It,
>> BTW, does not suffice to add --disable-multilibs.)
>
> What do you mean it does not suffice? Do you mean it's not a good
> enough solution, or it doesn't actually solve the problem? If the
> latter, did you try spelling it correctly, --disable-multilib
> (singular)?
See, this is also another trap (yep, it happened to me long ago on
multiple occasions).
> In any case, the point stands: someone needs to do the work, insisting
> on it being done doesn't do it.