Date: Fri, 10 Mar 2000 16:52:32 +0100
From: Andreas Schwab <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
|> Executing a shell script does use a bit more memory, but only just
|> enough for "/bin/sh" and the name of the script to execute. If that
|> is pushing H.J. over the memory limit, then he must have b
On Fri, Mar 10, 2000 at 02:11:03PM -0300, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
>
> Then please explain how come pexecute prints that message.
>
> I assume you're running on some Unix flavor, probably GNU/Linux, so
> the last variant of pexecute is used. The only situation in which
Yes.
> program (gcc); pro
On Mar 10, 2000, "H . J . Lu" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 10, 2000 at 01:36:50PM -0300, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
>> On Mar 9, 2000, "H . J . Lu" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> > gcc: installation problem, cannot exec
>> > `/work/ia64/bin/cygnus/2303/gcc/collect2': Argument list
On Mar 9, 2000, "H . J . Lu" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> gcc: installation problem, cannot exec
> `/work/ia64/bin/cygnus/2303/gcc/collect2': Argument list too long
Hey! This comes up long before libtool's ld-new is ever started.
It's the gcc
On Fri, Mar 10, 2000 at 01:36:50PM -0300, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
> On Mar 9, 2000, "H . J . Lu" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > gcc: installation problem, cannot exec
> > `/work/ia64/bin/cygnus/2303/gcc/collect2': Argument list too long
>
>
>
Ian Lance Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
|> I'm still surprised by something here. The error message which
|> H.J. cites is from libiberty/pexecute.c. That means that the exec
|> which should start the shell script is failing. The case is precisely
|> identical from the point of view of gc
Date: Thu, 9 Mar 2000 23:10:39 +0100
From: Andreas Schwab <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Ian Lance Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
|>Date: Thu, 9 Mar 2000 11:50:59 -0800
|>From: "H . J . Lu" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
|>
|>I know this patch doesn't look very clean. But I don't
On Mar 9, 2000, "H . J . Lu" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 09, 2000 at 11:12:42PM -0300, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
>> On Mar 9, 2000, "H . J . Lu" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> >> all: stmp-run-ld
>> >> stmp-run-ld: ld-new
>> >> @ ./ld-new > $@ 2>&1
>>
>> > Tried. It doesn't work w
On Thu, Mar 09, 2000 at 11:12:42PM -0300, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
> On Mar 9, 2000, "H . J . Lu" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >> all: stmp-run-ld
> >> stmp-run-ld: ld-new
> >> @ ./ld-new > $@ 2>&1
>
> > Tried. It doesn't work with parallel build due to the recursive make.
>
> Use `all-am', th
On Mar 9, 2000, "H . J . Lu" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> all: stmp-run-ld
>> stmp-run-ld: ld-new
>> @ ./ld-new > $@ 2>&1
> Tried. It doesn't work with parallel build due to the recursive make.
Use `all-am', then.
--
Alexandre Oliva http://www.ic.unicamp.br/~oliva/ Enjoy Guaraná
Cyg
On Thu, Mar 09, 2000 at 10:41:22PM -0300, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
> On Mar 9, 2000, "H . J . Lu" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > As the result, ./ld/ld-new, which is a shell script, uses too many
> > arguments when it was executed the first time.
>
> What I don't understand is why it doesn't us
On Mar 9, 2000, "H . J . Lu" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> As the result, ./ld/ld-new, which is a shell script, uses too many
> arguments when it was executed the first time.
What I don't understand is why it doesn't use too many arguments
afterwards... Do you know?
> The idea is to create .li
Ian Lance Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
|>Date: Thu, 9 Mar 2000 11:50:59 -0800
|>From: "H . J . Lu" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
|>
|>I know this patch doesn't look very clean. But I don't know automake
|>well enough to make it better. Here is the problem I am trying to fix.
|>I
On Thu, Mar 09, 2000 at 11:58:15AM -0800, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
>Date: Thu, 9 Mar 2000 11:50:59 -0800
>From: "H . J . Lu" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
>I know this patch doesn't look very clean. But I don't know automake
>well enough to make it better. Here is the problem I am trying t
Date: Thu, 9 Mar 2000 11:50:59 -0800
From: "H . J . Lu" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
I know this patch doesn't look very clean. But I don't know automake
well enough to make it better. Here is the problem I am trying to fix.
I got:
# /work/ia64/bin/cygnus/2303/gcc/xgcc
-B/usr/ia64-
I know this patch doesn't look very clean. But I don't know automake
well enough to make it better. Here is the problem I am trying to fix.
I got:
# /work/ia64/bin/cygnus/2303/gcc/xgcc
-B/usr/ia64-cygnus-linux/ia64-cygnus-linux/bin/
-B/usr/ia64-cygnus-linux/ia64-cygnus-linux/lib/ -B/work/ia
16 matches
Mail list logo
