On 17-02-2015 08:05, Pierre Labastie wrote: > Le 17/02/2015 00:40, Fernando de Oliveira a écrit : >> Actually, Michael Stahl included a new work-around. It was necessary gcc >> (GCC) 4.9.2 20141101 (Red Hat 4.9.2-1) and a change of a switch hit the >> bug [1], who previously couldn't reproduce it [1] >> >> Closing comment [3] in the bug has the info to find the patch [4]. >> >> If someone wishes to try the patch and add to our repository, I am >> attaching the original one here. I will try to test probably tomorrow. > I'll do that, > > I understand the patch is not needed on 64 bit, is it?
Well, both patches (the one on the book and the new one) are work-around, build fixes, not new developments. Originally reported only for i686, at some point, people included x86_64. I only tested the older patch in 32 bit. If you have built for 64 bit, without a gcc-4.9 patch, any LO version since 4.2.3.3, it is an indication that we can keep our note that the patch is only for 32 bit. And I think at least one of you, Ken or Bruce have done that. If my last sentence is false, I believe that builds during the BLFS freeze will demonstrate the point. -- []s, Fernando -- http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/blfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
