[Bug bootstrap/42002] Bootstrap failure: ld doesn't find 64-bit libelf on Fedora 11
--- Comment #3 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-11-11 14:20 --- Not sure where you searched, http://download.fedora.redhat.com/pub/fedora/linux/updates/11/ppc/ certainly contains both elfutils-libelf-devel-0.142-1.fc11.ppc.rpm elfutils-libelf-devel-0.142-1.fc11.ppc64.rpm and similarly Everything tree. And F12 also supports ppc64. This is all distro specific and doesn't belong here though. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42002
[Bug bootstrap/42002] Bootstrap failure: ld doesn't find 64-bit libelf on Fedora 11
--- Comment #2 from lucier at math dot purdue dot edu 2009-11-11 13:52 --- Thanks a lot for the explanation! I'm looking through the list of packages on Fedora with elfutils in the title; there is no elfutils-libelf-devel.ppc64, but the only ppc64 packages I can find are elfutils-devel-0.142-1.fc11 (ppc64) with file list /usr/include/dwarf.h /usr/include/elfutils /usr/include/elfutils/elf-knowledge.h /usr/include/elfutils/libasm.h /usr/include/elfutils/libdw.h /usr/include/elfutils/libdwfl.h /usr/include/elfutils/libebl.h /usr/include/elfutils/version.h /usr/lib64/libasm.so /usr/lib64/libdw.so /usr/lib64/libebl.a and elfutils-libelf-0.142-1.fc11 (ppc64) with file list /usr/lib64/libelf-0.142.so /usr/lib64/libelf.so.1 So I put in the link from libelf.so to libelf.so.1 by hand and the bootstrap is proceeding. Should I file a bug report with Fedora? I was told Fedora 12 won't support ppc64, so maybe there's no point. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42002
[Bug bootstrap/42002] Bootstrap failure: ld doesn't find 64-bit libelf on Fedora 11
--- Comment #1 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-11-11 06:51 --- The last command shows that while you have libelf installed, you don't have libelf.so symlink for the 64-bit libelf. So, you need to yum install elfutils-libelf-devel.ppc64 -- jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution||INVALID http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42002