This is the mail archive of the gdb-patches@sourceware.org mailing list for the GDB project.
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |
Other format: | [Raw text] |
On Monday 25 September 2006 14:47, Michael Snyder wrote: > Not to say you're wrong, but this is the first I've heard > that linux-gnu implies glibc. Is there someplace where this > is written? common practice ? :) in the uClibc world we use $arch-$vendor-linux-uclibc to keep things clean and sep from the host glibc toolchain $arch-$vendor-linux-gnu ... when we proposed adding support for *-linux-uclibc and *-linux-newlib and *-linux-dietlibc to binutils, the cleaner solution was to simply accept *-linux-* in configure files upstream libtool changed their files a while ago to accept 'linux*)' rather than 'linux-gnu*)' ... so my patch isnt treading into new territory, it's backporting updates from upstream libtool -mike
Attachment:
pgp00000.pgp
Description: PGP signature
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |