From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Nick Ing-Simmons To: rra@stanford.edu Cc: Gerald Pfeifer , gcc@gcc.gnu.org Subject: Re: GCC 2.95.x: Major problems on Solaris (was: Lost specific.html FAQEntry) Date: Tue, 31 Aug 1999 23:20:00 -0000 Message-ID: <199908301627.RAA14769@tiuk.ti.com> References: X-SW-Source: 1999-08n/msg01012.html Message-ID: <19990831232000.MZbgyviDWOfrSXS0By6gkPuLk_krr0DtCZ-4B_AVzl0@z> Russ Allbery writes: >Gerald Pfeifer writes: > >> 5. Has someone experiencing these problems already submitted bug reports >> to the binutils developers resp. Sun? > >I haven't, under the assumption that the hint file entry in Perl saying >that GNU ld wouldn't work meant that this was a known problem. It has been a "known problem" for years. The _original_ problem was GNU ld not honouring LD_RUN_PATH nor -R or equivalent. IIRC the exact problem has varied over the years. There was a version around binutils-2.8.? when it did work, but it was too hard for us to explain to the clueless that they needed to install new binutils and possibly re-build gcc. (Lots of comparitively clueless want to build and use perl.) Now that GNU ld actually gains something (at least for C++) it is worth taking the time to figure it out. >If people >think it would help, I can try it again in a few days and put together a >fuller problem report. Copy to perl5-porters@perl.org too - at very least Configure will probably need tweaks to command line stuff. >Perl makes extensive use of dynamically loaded >modules, and the symptom that I was seeing was that when all of Perl was >linked with GNU ld, it couldn't load the dynamic modules that it had just >built. -- Nick Ing-Simmons