diff options
Diffstat (limited to 'FAQ.in')
| -rw-r--r-- | FAQ.in | 36 |
1 files changed, 17 insertions, 19 deletions
@@ -66,8 +66,7 @@ a local mirror first. You should always try to use the latest official release. Older versions may not have all the features GNU libc requires. The current releases of -gcc (2.95 or newer) should work with the GNU C library (for powerpc see -?powerpc; for ARM see ?arm; for MIPS see ?mips). +gcc (3.2 or newer) should work with the GNU C library (for MIPS see ?mips). Please note that gcc 2.95 and 2.95.x cannot compile glibc on Alpha due to problems in the complex float support. @@ -98,18 +97,11 @@ them. ??powerpc Which compiler should I use for powerpc? -{GK} You want to use at least gcc 2.95 (together with the right versions -of all the other tools, of course). See also ?excpt. +{} Removed. Does not apply anymore. ??arm Which tools should I use for ARM? -{PB} You should use egcs 1.1 or a later version. For ELF systems some -changes are needed to the compiler; a patch against egcs-1.1.x can be found -at: - -<ftp://ftp.netwinder.org/users/p/philb/egcs-1.1.1pre2-diff-981126> - -Binutils 2.10.1 or later is also required. +{} Removed. Does not apply anymore. ?? Do I need some more things to compile the GNU C Library? @@ -305,9 +297,7 @@ test in the sources. There are some failures which are not directly related to the GNU libc: - Some compilers produce buggy code. No compiler gets single precision - complex numbers correct on Alpha. Otherwise, the egcs 1.1 release should be - ok; gcc 2.8.1 might cause some failures; gcc 2.7.2.x is so buggy that - explicit checks have been used so that you can't build with it. + complex numbers correct on Alpha. Otherwise, gcc-3.2 should be ok. - The kernel might have bugs. For example on Linux/Alpha 2.0.34 the floating point handling has quite a number of bugs and therefore most of the test cases in the math subdirectory will fail. Linux 2.2 has @@ -367,8 +357,8 @@ newer. ??mips Which tools should I use for MIPS? -{AJ} You should use the current development version of gcc 3.0 or newer from -CVS. gcc 2.95.x does not work correctly on mips-linux. +{AJ} You should use the current development version of gcc 3.2 or newer from +CVS. You need also recent binutils, anything before and including 2.11 will not work correctly. Either try the Linux binutils 2.11.90.0.5 from HJ Lu or the @@ -635,7 +625,7 @@ you got with your distribution. glibc 2.x? {AJ} There's only correct support for glibc 2.0.x in gcc 2.7.2.3 or later. -But you should get at least gcc 2.95.2.1 (or later versions) instead. +But you should get at least gcc 2.95.3 (or later versions) anyway ?? The `gencat' utility cannot process the catalog sources which were used on my Linux libc5 based system. Why? @@ -1025,7 +1015,8 @@ repository. {BH} You are using g++ 2.95.2? After upgrading to glibc 2.2, you need to apply a patch to the include files in /usr/include/g++, because the fpos_t type has changed in glibc 2.2. The patch is at -http://clisp.cons.org/~haible/gccinclude-glibc-2.2-compat.diff + + http://www.haible.de/bruno/gccinclude-glibc-2.2-compat.diff ?? When recompiling GCC, I get compilation errors in libio. @@ -1033,7 +1024,6 @@ http://clisp.cons.org/~haible/gccinclude-glibc-2.2-compat.diff This version is needed because the fpos_t type and a few libio internals have changed in glibc 2.2, and gcc 2.95.3 contains a corresponding patch. - ?? Why shall glibc never get installed on GNU/Linux systems in /usr/local? @@ -1047,6 +1037,14 @@ installation, use another directory as argument to --prefix. If you like to install this glibc version as default version, overriding the existing one, use --prefix=/usr and everything will go in the right places. +?? When recompiling GCC, I get compilation errors in libstdc++. + +{BH} You are trying to recompile gcc 3.2? You need to patch gcc 3.2, +because some last minute changes were made in glibc 2.3 which were not +known when gcc 3.2 was released. The patch is at + + http://www.haible.de/bruno/gcc-3.2-glibc-2.3-compat.diff + ? Source and binary incompatibilities, and what to do about them ?? I expect GNU libc to be 100% source code compatible with |