🚀 go-pugleaf

On Sat, 25 Aug 2001, HateLinux said:
> So I corrected a couple of links to the kernel source (asm and linux
> links). I did not find any references to these links in the gcc docs ,

It wouldn't have them; GCC is not Linux-specific, and the necessity for
those links comes from glibc, not GCC. The glibc FAQ mentions the links.

>              Finished prerequisites of target file `cc1'.
>             Must remake target `cc1'.
> gcc  -DIN_GCC    -g  -W -Wall -Wwrite-strings -Wstrict-prototypes
> -Wmissing-prototypes -Wtraditional -pedantic -Wno-long-long
> -DHAVE_CONFIG_H  -o cc1 \
>         c-parse.o c-lang.o c-errors.o c-lex.o c-pragma.o c-decl.o
> c-typeck.o c-convert.o c-aux-info.o c-common.o c-format.o
> c-semantics.o c-dump.o libcpp.a  toplev.o libbackend.a obstack.o
> ./intl/libintl.a      ../libiberty/libiberty.a
> Child access: user 0 (real 0), group 0 (real 0)
> gcc: ../libiberty/libiberty.a: No such file or directory

You've got a broken make, I guess, or a missing `ar'. libiberty is built
as the first stage of the bootstrap, in /usr/local.

If a build fails because of system-wide problems like missing include
files or includes pointing in the wrong place, zapping the build
directory and restarting from `configure' is wise; you'll probably find
it works then. (Maybe.)

> Which is exactly the error I had under redhat and gcc-2.96.

Strange error. What's in the libiberty/ build directory? There should be
a libiberty.a there.

-- 
`It's all about bossing computers around. Users have to say "please".
Programmers get to say "do what I want NOW or the hard disk gets it".'
                        -- Richard Heathfield on the nature of programming