This is the mail archive of the
binutils@sources.redhat.com
mailing list for the binutils project.
Re: Build failure on Debian testing (cross to arm-none-eabi)
- From: Zack Weinberg <zack at codesourcery dot com>
- To: Jerome Guitton <guitton at gnat dot com>
- Cc: Julian Brown <julian at codesourcery dot com>, binutils at sources dot redhat dot com
- Date: Fri, 22 Apr 2005 09:53:53 -0700
- Subject: Re: Build failure on Debian testing (cross to arm-none-eabi)
- References: <4267FE0E.3060202@codesourcery.com><20050422093547.GE15341@adacore.com>
Jerome Guitton <guitton@gnat.com> writes:
> Julian Brown (julian@codesourcery.com):
>> In file included from /home/jules/binutils/src/bfd/doc/chew.c:86:
>> /home/jules/binutils/src/bfd/sysdep.h:140: error: parse error before
>> "ftello64"
>> /home/jules/binutils/src/bfd/sysdep.h:140: warning: data definition has
>> no type or storage class
>> /home/jules/binutils/src/bfd/sysdep.h:152: error: parse error before
>> "off64_t"
>
> Mmmm... Sorry for this one. I am able to reproduce it on a linux
> host. I am investigating.
This reminds me ... in the past, I've had problems with binutils'
habit of generating the documentation at install time. For instance,
in a rather complicated environment where I built the software, then
handed it over to a sysadmin for installation, and he didn't have the
same $PATH as I did, and it blew up not being able to find either
makeinfo or cc.
GCC builds the documentation as part of "make all" - this works much
better in that sort of environment, and would have caught this bug as
well. What do people think of changing it?
zw