On 1/1/06, Greg Schafer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Tushar Teredesai wrote: > > > Additionally, the libgcc_s.so symlink is not needed. Only the > > libgcc_s.so.1 is needed so that glibc can dlopen that library (used in > > nptl). > > Are you sure?
It found the libgcc_s in /tools/lib/gcc/i686-pc-linux-gnu/4.0.2/../../../libgcc_s.so. > but ISTM that LFS Unstable has therefore regressed to linking Ch 6 > Binutils and GCC against the (wrong) Glibc in /tools! Luckily, there is > enough redundancy within the build method to make this fairly harmless.. > but it still doesn't escape that fact that it's just plain wrong. It > *WILL* bite in some scenarios eg: ICA will show up differences if you > happen to build different Glibc's in Ch 5 and Ch 6 (like I do in DIY - > non-optimized in temptools phase versus optimized in chroot phase). Confirmed. Though it did come as a surprise. When I tried the test that you mentioned, it found the glibc libraries in /tools/lib, not in /usr/lib. I checked the command that was passed to ld and there was no -L/tools/lib. so it should have just found the libs in /usr/lib and /lib (as per the LIB_PATH). -- Tushar Teredesai mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/~tushar/ -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
