Subject: Re: gcc 3.3 & '/usr/bin/ld: cannot find -lgcc_eh'
To: grant beattie <firstname.lastname@example.org>
From: David Brownlee <email@example.com>
Date: 06/08/2003 23:25:40
On Mon, 9 Jun 2003, grant beattie wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 08, 2003 at 09:14:39PM +0100, David Brownlee wrote:
> > > include mk/gcc.buildlink2.mk so it can find libgcc_eh.
> > Should every program thet gets built with gcc3 include
> > mk/gcc.buildlink2.mk (as in should there be a test for that
> > in bsd.pkg.mk?)
> only those which need "special care" - most packages don't need
> anything special to build with gcc3. the above is indeed a side-effect
> of buildlink2.
> gcc3 is a large beast, and including gcc.buildlink2.mk adds a
> considerable amount of time to the buildlink target for no reason in
> most packages, which is why I chose to not do that automatically.
> and for those who are about to say "we'll need to change all this
> when gcc3 is in base NetBSD"... no, only small changes will be
> required, and this stuff will still be required for non-NetBSD
> systems. :-)
It seems strange to include mk/gcc.buildlink2.mk in a package
that doesn't actually require gcc, just special handling in
the case of gcc3. Maybe it should be
. include "../../mk/gcc.buildlink2.mk"
David/absolute -- www.netbsd.org: No hype required --