Question about egcs-1.1.1 & glibc-2.0.10x (fwd)

Question about egcs-1.1.1 & glibc-2.0.10x (fwd)

[Alex Buell]

Hi guys,

Forgive me for posting this, but I needed to know.  I'e been testing
egcs-1.1.1 with glibc-2.0.105 & glibc-2.0.106. Both builds of glibc failed
at the exact _same_ place with a missing CPP preprocessor. The place where
it occured was in sunrpc.

Has anyone _actually_ succeeded in building glibc using the egcs-1.1.1
compiler? 

Cheers,
Alex
--
 /\_/\  Legalise cannabis now! 
( o.o ) Grow some cannabis today!
 > ^ <  Peace, Love, Unity and Respect to all.

http://www.tahallah.demon.co.uk - *new* - rewritten for text browser users!

Linux tahallah 2.1.131 #66 SMP Sat Dec 5 19:22:40 EST 1998
Two Intel Pentium Pro 166MHz processors, 331.78 total bogomips, 48M RAM
System library 2.0.105

Re: Question about egcs-1.1.1 & glibc-2.0.10x (fwd)

[Matthew Kirkwood]

On Thu, 10 Dec 1998, Alex Buell wrote:

> Forgive me for posting this, but I needed to know.  I'e been testing
> egcs-1.1.1 with glibc-2.0.105 & glibc-2.0.106. Both builds of glibc
> failed at the exact _same_ place with a missing CPP preprocessor. The
> place where it occured was in sunrpc.

cd /lib
ln -snf ../usr/local/lib/gcc-lib/MY_MACHINE_TYPE/egcs-2.whatever/cpp .

Matthew.

Re: Question about egcs-1.1.1 & glibc-2.0.10x (fwd)

[Franz Sirl]

At 13:17 10.12.98 , Alex Buell wrote:
>Hi guys,
>
>Forgive me for posting this, but I needed to know.  I'e been testing
>egcs-1.1.1 with glibc-2.0.105 & glibc-2.0.106. Both builds of glibc failed
>at the exact _same_ place with a missing CPP preprocessor. The place where
>it occured was in sunrpc.
>
>Has anyone _actually_ succeeded in building glibc using the egcs-1.1.1
>compiler? 

Yes, built 105 and just building 106.
Your problem is that the glibc sunrpc stuff only checks for cpp in $PATH or
/lib/cpp. My opinion is that GNU stuff should also try to use "gcc -E", but
for now do "ln -sf /usr/lib/gcc-lib/(your platform code)/egcs-2.91.60/cpp
/lib/cpp".

Franz.