Re: Time for glibc 2.1.2 final?

[Andreas Jaeger <aj@arthur.rhein-neckar.de>]

>>>>> Ulrich Drepper writes:

Uli> Andreas Jaeger <aj@arthur.rhein-neckar.de> writes:

>> - Geoff's changes made to FAQ 2.8 in glibc 2.2 should be made to glibc
>> 2.1 also.

Uli> Which changes?

I'm appending them below.

Andreas

--- FAQ.in	Sat Aug 28 06:52:06 1999
+++ ../libc/FAQ.in	Sun Sep  5 19:38:33 1999
@@ -569,7 +573,7 @@
 
 GROUP ( libc.so.6 libc_nonshared.a )
 
-??	When I run an executable on one system which I compiled on
+??excpt	When I run an executable on one system which I compiled on
 	another, I get dynamic linker errors.  Both systems have the same
 	version of glibc installed.  What's wrong?
 
@@ -600,6 +604,24 @@
 problem.  But you nevertheless should use EGCS for other reasons
 (see ?binsize).
 
+{GK} On some Linux distributions for PowerPC, you can see this when you have
+built gcc or egcs from the Web sources (gcc versions 2.95 or earlier), then
+re-built glibc.  This happens because in these versions of gcc, exception
+handling is implemented using an older method; the people making the
+distributions are a little ahead of their time.
+
+A quick solution to this is to find the libgcc.a file that came with the
+distribution (it would have been installed under /usr/lib/gcc-lib), do 
+`ar x libgcc.a frame.o' to get the frame.o file out, and add a line saying
+`LDLIBS-c.so += frame.o' to the file `configparms' in the directory you're
+building in.  You can check you've got the right `frame.o' file by running
+`nm frame.o' and checking that it has the symbols defined that you're
+missing.
+
+This will let you build glibc with the C compiler.  The C++ compiler
+will still be binary incompatible with any C++ shared libraries that
+you got with your distribution.
+
 ??	How can I compile gcc 2.7.2.1 from the gcc source code using
 	glibc 2.x?
 
 
-- 
 Andreas Jaeger   aj@arthur.rhein-neckar.de    jaeger@informatik.uni-kl.de
  for pgp-key finger ajaeger@aixd1.rhrk.uni-kl.de