fth...@telegraphics.com.au dixit: >You said on launchpad, "libgfortran cannot be built multilib because one >of the system includes contains inline assembly that is invalid with >-mfidoa" > >Which makes me wonder whether you are referring to etch system includes?
No, etch has libc 2.3, I have libc 2.5. But I think the issues are similar. >If so, since you don't need fortran to build sid libc, perhaps avoid >building that language until you have sid system includes. No, different thing. With multilib, it actually builds five variants of the libraries, one for each multiarch (-m68040 -m68080 -mfidoa and -mcpu32). I don’t think we need these, right now anyway. There were talks to do multiarchi between m68k and coldfire, though. >When I cross-compiled sid gcc-4.4, I had to remove debian's >"multiarch-include" patch. I'm not sure whether this relates to your >problem. SH4 had some issues with it too: Yes, I solved it differently, see the debdiff. >BTW, if it is still there, debian's "m68k-allow-gnu99" patch should be >removed before it causes problems. No. That one can only be removed once eglibc is in unstable, not before that. (At least from reading the patch comments.) bye, //mirabilos -- FWIW, I'm quite impressed with mksh interactively. I thought it was much *much* more bare bones. But it turns out it beats the living hell out of ksh93 in that respect. I'd even consider it for my daily use if I hadn't wasted half my life on my zsh setup. :-) -- Frank Terbeck in #!/bin/mksh -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-68k-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/pine.bsm.4.64l.1004241133200.6...@herc.mirbsd.org
