building gcc 4.4.5 from source on Fedora 13

Andrew Haley
Tue Nov 30 14:45:00 GMT 2010

On 11/30/2010 02:33 PM, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> This is still off-topic for this list...
> On 30 November 2010 14:19, Mr Dash Four wrote:
>> There is no mismatch - just common sense. The same common sense which tells
>> me that whoever created gcc.spec need to have a good hard look at themselves
>> as the amount of flexibility which it gives to developers like myself is
>> grand total of zero, let alone that it does NOT do the job it is designed to
>> do - build GCC.
> The job it's designed to do is build GCC RPMs *for Fedora* in order to
> distribute RPMs for Fedora. It's not necessarily meant for end users
> to rebuild packages that they can just install from a repo (because
> we've already established you didn't really need to build from source
> anyway, you just needed to install some additional packages - and in
> fact building from source *still* doesn't do what you want - even more
> reason to just install those additional packages and be done with it.)
> Andrew said "But that's not what it's supposed to do.  The 32-bit
> libraries are built as part of the 32-bit distro."
> IIUC to get the i686 packages you need to build on i686. Rightly or
> wrongly, building on x86_64 gets you the 64bit packages, and the 32bit
> ones come from a separate repo that was built for i686, on i686.

That's right, and we do it that way to make sure we have only one set of
32-bit libraries.


More information about the Gcc-help mailing list