http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32263
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
--- Comment #9 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-05 20:11 ---
(In reply to comment #7)
> A "known working version" list seems very simple to maintain.
Again this is not really a GCC question. As mentioned before the requirements
of GCC itself is almost nothing. It is question
--- Comment #8 from appfault at hotmail dot com 2008-11-04 23:47 ---
Reopen to at least consider comment 7.
--
appfault at hotmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #7 from appfault at hotmail dot com 2007-12-06 17:26 ---
Instead of trying to lock down the full and complete list of acceptable glibs,
you could at least give a hint as to what GCC was using at the time a given
release did work.
A "known working version" list seems very sim
--- Comment #6 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-12-02 21:35 ---
This is not a bug which GCC can fix really so closing as invalid. GCC can be
used with many older glibc. Though sometimes newer GCC can cause older glibc
to fail build.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed
--- Comment #5 from appfault at hotmail dot com 2007-06-13 17:56 ---
Ok well, I'll take your word on that, since I can't really tell where gcc and
ld end and glibc begins. It's perhaps glibc that is in need of better
documentation then. However if I file such a zilla I suspect it will
--- Comment #4 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-06-12 04:34 ---
(In reply to comment #3)
> Well here's one example:
>
> http://foo-projects.org/pipermail/lunar-dev/2006-July/005821.html is the error
Actually that is a build failure with glibc. The real question is, does glibc
--- Comment #3 from appfault at hotmail dot com 2007-06-11 16:35 ---
Well here's one example:
http://foo-projects.org/pipermail/lunar-dev/2006-July/005821.html is the error
you get when bootstrapping using binutils 2.17 with gcc 3.4.6 and glibc 2.3.6.
Reverting to binutils 2.15 fixes t
--- Comment #2 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-06-08 20:18 ---
I think we need more information from you about what issues you are running
into.
I also use glibc 2.3.2 with many different versions of GCC too. I still don't
see what regressions you are talking about anyways.
-
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-06-08 20:16 ---
HUH? I had never had any problems with older versions of GCC with newer
versions of binutils. If you do then either it is a bug in the older version
of GCC (which is likely) or a bug in the newer binutils (which is
10 matches
Mail list logo
