Ken Moffat ken at
Fri Oct 7 08:29:09 PDT 2005

On Fri, 7 Oct 2005, Luca wrote:

> On the host gcc version is 3.3.5 but in Cross-LFS you compile it just after 
> glibc-headers. Well, I think I will install gcc-4.0.2 on the host in opt.
> Luca 

  Oh, thanks for putting me straight :)  I'm ambivalent about whether the 
glibc headers are needed on the architectures I have, but so far I 
haven't got round to testing x86_64.

  I was going to offer you the following hack (untested) which tests the 
cross-compiler instead of the native compiler.  Of course, it's possible 
that something about installing the headers will actually need gcc-3.4 
or newer on the host, you never can tell with glibc.

  FWIW, the documentation still refers to gcc-3.2 or newer.


--- glibc-20050926/configure.orig	2005-10-07 16:14:01.000000000 +0100
+++ glibc-20050926/configure	2005-10-07 16:21:27.000000000 +0100
@@ -4111,9 +4111,9 @@ if test -z "$CC"; then
    # Found it, now check the version.
-  echo "$as_me:$LINENO: checking version of $CC" >&5
-echo $ECHO_N "checking version of $CC... $ECHO_C" >&6
-  ac_prog_version=`$CC -v 2>&1 | sed -n 's/^.*version \([egcygnustpi-]*[0-9.]*\).*$/\1/p'`
+  echo "$as_me:$LINENO: checking version of ${ac_tool_prefix}gcc" >&5
+echo $ECHO_N "checking version of ${ac_tool_prefix}gcc... $ECHO_C" >&6
+  ac_prog_version=`${ac_tool_prefix}gcc -v 2>&1 | sed -n 's/^.*version \([egcygnustpi-]*[0-9.]*\).*$/\1/p'`
    case $ac_prog_version in
      '') ac_prog_version="v. ?.??, bad"; ac_verc_fail=yes;;
      3.4* | 4.[0-9]* )

  das eine Mal als Tragödie, das andere Mal als Farce

More information about the lfs-support mailing list