From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: by sourceware.org (Postfix, from userid 48)
	id 826593858D33; Thu, 11 Apr 2024 21:00:59 +0000 (GMT)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 826593858D33
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gcc.gnu.org;
	s=default; t=1712869259;
	bh=WG5PgC7bRuM+GASrXOgo76nP0KwEhsxxOAfIgZ4kPKs=;
	h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From;
	b=VdF/gKejL7PMGSfL5c9/pjGzqM/pCJz/tYXomDOifNbHzfM/N8nDezz/6ope2uqcH
	 Axqc9VgDWZ+DXMLX+sOiz6jeVeAoQIS8JfF+8Lafk/nef+fiG6Ml4pR8BWVIfe9YP0
	 7Ppnq3hI/IGAwmxTjiEZJaWKL4izyUxWW5cAODJk=
From: "pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug driver/97304] Boostrap failure on freebsd: ld: error: unable to
 find library -lc
Date: Thu, 11 Apr 2024 21:00:59 +0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: driver
X-Bugzilla-Version: 11.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: build
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: NEW
X-Bugzilla-Resolution: 
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: ---
X-Bugzilla-Flags: 
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: component
Message-ID: <bug-97304-4-t44xh0kgUE@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-97304-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-97304-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Bugzilla-URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
MIME-Version: 1.0
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.sourceware.org>

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D97304

Andrew Pinski <pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Component|target                      |driver

--- Comment #16 from Andrew Pinski <pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to Thomas Koenig from comment #15)
> > I am suspect we might be able to remove this and it will work but there
> > needs to be a lot of testing on many different targets and such.
>=20
> A configure test, maybe?

Considering it is all new (modern) ld that do this and I don't think it wou=
ld
hurt all others, removing that code might be the best thing really. Plus it=
 is
code that dates from the early 90s so I think it is way out of date really.=