[lto] libelf header

[Gabriel Dos Reis]

Jakub Jelinek <jakub@redhat.com> writes:

| > Should that read
| > 
| >    #include <libelf/libelf.h>
| 
| No, because on other systems it is directly in /usr/include:
| rpm -qf /usr/include/libelf.h
| elfutils-libelf-devel-0.119-1.2.1
| and there is no /usr/include/libelf/ directory.
| Guess GCC configure should make sure the needed -I path_to_libelf_h
| is added if it is not already in the system search path.
| 
| 	Jakub

Daniel Berlin <dberlin@dberlin.org> writes:

| Gabriel Dos Reis wrote:
| > Hi,
| > 
| >   My first attempt to compile the lto branch met with resistance:
| > 
| > /home/gdr/redhat/lto.gcc/gcc/lto/lto-elf.c:27:20: error: libelf.h: No such file or directory
| > 
| > 
| > libelf (0.8.5-35) 
| 
| This libelf is too old, see michael matz's message.
| You are going to have to grab 0.8.8 from the libelf homepage to compile
| this ATM.
| 
| 
| >is installed on my system in the standard include
| > directory (/usr/include) as libelf/libelf.h.   
| > 
| > lto/lto-elf.c:27 currently says
| > 
| >    #include "libelf.h"
| > 
| > 
| > Should that read
| > 
| >    #include <libelf/libelf.h>
| > 
| 
| So, the thing is that other libelfs are directly installing their header
| in /usr/include/libelf.h
| 
| (this include elfutils-libelf, solaris libelf, etc).
| 
| Thus, this probably need to be autoconf'd.


Thanks to both of you.  I'll see whether Autoconf would like to talk
with me.

-- Gaby