akhiezer wrote: >> Date: Wed, 26 Feb 2014 16:28:48 -0600 >> From: Bruce Dubbs <bruce.du...@gmail.com> >> To: LFS Developers Mailinglist <lfs-dev@linuxfromscratch.org> >> Subject: Re: [lfs-dev] gcc pass 1/2 instructions re mpfr/gmp/mpc. >> >> Pierre Labastie wrote: >>> Le 26/02/2014 22:47, Bruce Dubbs a écrit : >>>> [ ! -e /usr/lib/libgmp.so ] && echo "/usr/lib/libgmp.so missing" >>> Might not be so easy. On Debian we get: >>> ----------- >>> pierre@turboli:~$ [ ! -e /usr/lib/libgmp.so ] && >>> echo "/usr/lib/libgmp.so missing" >>> /usr/lib/libgmp.so missing >>> ------------- >>> while: >>> ---------------- >>> pierre@turboli:~$ ldd /usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-linux-gnu/4.8.2/cc1 >>> linux-vdso.so.1 (0x00007fff765fe000) >>> libcloog-isl.so.4 => /usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libcloog-isl.so.4 >>> (0x00007fe4aca72000) >>> libisl.so.10 => /usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libisl.so.10 >>> (0x00007fe4ac735000) >>> libmpc.so.3 => /usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libmpc.so.3 >>> (0x00007fe4ac51c000) >>> libmpfr.so.4 => /usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libmpfr.so.4 >>> (0x00007fe4ac2c1000) >>> libgmp.so.10 => /usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libgmp.so.10 >>> (0x00007fe4ac049000) >>> [...] >>> ------------------ >>> (sorry for line breakage) >> >> Maybe >> >> if [ $(find /usr/lib -name libmpc.so\* | wc -l) == 0 ]; then >> echo "libmpc libraries are not installed" >> fi >> > > > Iirc from thread - but have not gone back to check yet - gcc was looking > in a set of ~standard search paths; will try to re-check over the weekend. > > > But in any case, might it be prudent to not put stuff in the book re this, > until it can be reproduced; wasn't really meaning for stuff to go straight > into book without that; instead, the post was more to get the ball rolling > again on finally nailing this one yes/no.
I agree. > > If there is a confirmed general-enough problem, but not confirmed 'til > post-release of lfs-7.5, then it could go into book as an erratum? One > wouldn't, I'd expect, want to put stuff into host-sys-reqs now, then find > they're not needed, and have to put in an erratum about _that_. Yes, I think that's the right approach. -- Bruce -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
