GCC 3.3.1 vastly different failure #'s (ch 5 lfs 5.0, 2nd pass)
fmzoltan at mindspring.com
Sat Mar 13 12:57:08 PST 2004
Ken Moffat wrote:
> On Fri, 12 Mar 2004, zoltan wrote:
>>So are these what would be considered "vastly" different results for the
>> second pass of GCC 3.3.1 in LFS-5.0 in chapter 5? Seems to me they
>>are...Am I the only one who's seen this, or is there perhaps something more?
>>BTW, my host system is an LFS 4.1 system, which runs great. I've
>>followed the LFS-5.0 instructions pretty much to the letter, except I've
>> replaced --prefix=/tools with --prefix=/my-own-tools globally (right
>>from the get-go, including SPEC file changes, etc. (consistently), so it
>>shouldn't be an issue...
>> === g++ Summary ===
>># of expected passes 7016
>># of unexpected failures 1166
>> === libstdc++-v3 Summary ===
>># of expected passes 258
>># of unexpected failures 195
> Something like this used to be seen in maybe the back end of last year.
> I don't remember the details, but I think I was one of the people bitten
> by it. If I'm right, it's either down to using a patch which enforces
> /tools (we were moving from /stage1 to /tools), or you missed changing a
> prefix somewhere. If I'm wrong, try searching the list archives for gcc
> unexpected failures.
Thank you...that was it. The spec file patch has hard-coded references
to /tools, which wasn't appropriate for me. All is well now...
More information about the lfs-support