[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

gcc-4.3 vs glibc?



I'm not liking the feeling that our old libc and new gcc-4.3
(gcc-4.3_4.3.0-2) aren't getting along well.

I have probably 20 failed packages, of which the following are
representative examples.

They all are compiled with -std=gnu99. It looks like that construct
worked fine for gcc-4.2.

Anyone care to follow this up? 

Makes me wonder if we can compile a modern glibc without TLS. I hope
someone reading this is feeling called to be the glibc maintainer for
m68k. Otherwise, I'm not sure we're going to get out of this.


gmp_2:4.2.2+dfsg-3

| /usr/include/sys/sysmacros.h:43: multiple definition of `gnu_dev_major'
| .libs/assert.o:/usr/include/sys/sysmacros.h:43: first defined here
| .libs/errno.o: In function `gnu_dev_minor':

m4_1.4.11-1

| /usr/lib/gcc/m68k-linux-gnu/4.3.1/include/stddef.h:214: error: duplicate
| 'unsigned'

rsync_3.0.1-1

| /tmp/ccMbBDKf.s: Assembler messages:
| /tmp/ccMbBDKf.s:280: Error: symbol `fstatat64' is already defined


Peace,

Stephen

-- 
Stephen R. Marenka     If life's not fun, you're not doing it right!
<stephen@marenka.net>

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature


Reply to: