Re: Why does static-gnulib include -lgcc_eh?

[Mike Frysinger <vapier at gentoo dot org>]

On Tuesday, August 30, 2011 16:07:03 Bryan Ischo wrote:
> On 08/30/11 13:01, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > oh magic archives, what do you contain !
> > http://sources.redhat.com/ml/libc-alpha/2003-09/msg00100.html
> > http://sourceware.org/ml/libc-alpha/2005-02/msg00042.html
> 
> Hey thanks for the links.  I guess I was on the right track.
> 
> Here is an interesting tidbit:
>  > Re: Crosscompiling issues with glibc-2.3.4
>  > 
>  >     From: Ulrich Drepper <drepper at redhat dot com>
>  >     To: Jeremy Huddleston <eradicator at gentoo dot org>
>  >     Cc: libc-alpha at sources dot redhat dot com
>  >     Date: Sat, 12 Feb 2005 14:09:29 -0800
>  >     Subject: Re: Crosscompiling issues with glibc-2.3.4
>  >     Organization: Red Hat, Inc.
>  >     References: <1108245892.30471.68.camel@cid.outersquare.org>
>  > 
>  > Cross-compiling is not supported.
> 
> That explains alot.  Well, it explains why the GNU toolchain is so
> crappy in this regard, but it doesn't explain why 'cross-compiling is
> not supported'.  A google search doesn't reveal any reasons for this,
> but there is another instance where the mantra is repeated:
> 
> http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=10545

if you're looking for sensibleness i'm afraid you've come to the wrong place.  
this is another reason i suggested you look at crosstool-ng: it picks up all 
the "unsupported" patches to make cross-compiling work.
-mike

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.