On Tue, 07 Sep 2004 10:41:44 -0700, Justin Erenkrantz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > --On Tuesday, September 7, 2004 1:00 PM -0400 Jim Jagielski > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > True, but this is one that I'm hitting a lot, especially > > with the increase in cache development going on... > > > > And this is the only bundled module that I've hit this on > > when httpd is build "normally". > > IMHO, the proper thing to do is add `gcc -print-libgcc-file-name` to the > shared module builds when we're using gcc 3+. -- justin
Won't gcc 3.2+ have dynamic reference to libgcc_s.so instead of static reference to libgcc.a? gcc < 3 will have static reference to libgcc.a too, but no -print-libgcc-file-name option :( Based on Joe's comment, this stuff depends on how gcc was built.
