This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the glibc project.
required gcc for 2.3
- From: Jack Howarth <howarth at bromo dot msbb dot uc dot edu>
- To: libc-alpha at sources dot redhat dot com, drepper at redhat dot com
- Date: Fri, 6 Sep 2002 09:19:43 -0400 (EDT)
- Subject: required gcc for 2.3
How rigid is the requirement for gcc 3.2 to build glibc 2.3?
I noticed that was stated in the current INSTALL. In general I
think that is a very good thing to have there. However on debian
we have a slew of arches which have not been properly tested
for their need of a sysdeps/<arch>/libgcc-compat.c (to provide
libgcc symbols that went .hidden in gcc > 3.1). I have proposed
to the debian glibc maintainers that, as a temporary workaround,
we just build those questionable arches on a gcc < 3.1 until
the libgcc-compat situation is resolved. Do you forsee any
major problems which such an approach? I was hoping that any
issues this might cause would be caught in make check, no?
Thanks in advance for any guidance on this.