On Sat, 2007-07-28 at 17:55 +1000, Peter Jeremy wrote: > On 2007-Jul-27 17:32:35 +0100, Tom Evans <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >gcc on amd64 is capable of generating i386 code, but ld on amd64 is > >incapable of linking i386 code together without serious amounts of work. > > Can you elaborate on what you mean by "incapable of linking i386 code"? > The stock ld can definitely link i386 code: > turion% ld -V > GNU ld version 2.15 [FreeBSD] 2004-05-23 > Supported emulations: > elf_i386_fbsd > elf_x86_64_fbsd > turion% > > There is a problem that the 32-bit pathnames on FreeBSD/amd64 are > different to the 32-bit pathnames on FreeBSD/i386 (ie an i386 > executable built on amd64 will point to /libexec/ld-elf32.so.1, rather > than /libexec/ld-elf.so.1) so the result won't execute on a > FreeBSD/i386 box - but I don't see that as a problem with ld, rather > the configuration. >
Sure. By 'incapable of linking i386 code' I mean that the default toolchain of gcc invoking ld to assemble libraries and object files into executables is incapable of doing so when compiling i386 code. I say without serious amounts of work because, as you point out, it is possible to do. Any other english sentences you need explaining?
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
