Issues with ld: "bootstrap with --static" rearing its ugly head

Erik Postma epostma at nl.tue.win
Tue Nov 11 15:07:51 PST 2003


On Tue, 11 Nov 2003 16:34:13 -0500 (EST), Bill's LFS Login
<lfsbill at nospam.dot> wrote:
> 
> Ouch! I sure hate to see you have to start over. What would the
> toolchain folks think of having someone with the same versions of stuff
> you have, and the same architecture, send you their libbfd? Since this
> is the stuff in /tools, it should be relatively "pure" and *almost*
> identical if it came from a platform that was the same (arch and
> gcc/glibc/binutils-wise) and at the proper stage of building.
> 
> Damn, if RH can send binaries out, we ought to be able to do it too!  :P
> 
> Hope I'm not looking too foolish with this thought.

In case we get the green light:

~ > uname -a
Linux linux 2.4.21 #1 Wed Jul 2 01:06:31 CEST 2003 i686 unknown
~ > cat /proc/cpuinfo 
processor       : 0
vendor_id       : AuthenticAMD
cpu family      : 6
model           : 4
model name      : AMD Athlon(tm) Processor
stepping        : 2
cpu MHz         : 1099.493
cache size      : 256 KB
fdiv_bug        : no
hlt_bug         : no
f00f_bug        : no
coma_bug        : no
fpu             : yes
fpu_exception   : yes
cpuid level     : 1
wp              : yes
flags           : fpu vme de pse tsc msr pae mce cx8 sep mtrr pge mca cmov
pat pse36 mmx fxsr syscall mmxext 3dnowext 3dnow 
bogomips        : 2195.45

Software versions according to LFS5.0, i.e. binutils-2.14, glibc-2.3.2,
gcc-3.3.1

-- 
Erik Postma (Email: reverse the order of nl, tue and win.)



More information about the lfs-support mailing list