Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Wed, 5 May 1999 23:50:02 +0100
From:      Mark Ovens <marko@uk.radan.com>
To:        Doug White <dwhite@resnet.uoregon.edu>
Cc:        FreeBSD-questions <questions@FreeBSD.ORG>
Subject:   Re: gcc differences between aout & ELF
Message-ID:  <19990505235002.C2189@marder-1>
In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.4.03.9905051414510.24610-100000@resnet.uoregon.edu>; from Doug White on Wed, May 05, 1999 at 02:15:41PM -0700
References:  <19990504235146.D419@marder-1> <Pine.BSF.4.03.9905051414510.24610-100000@resnet.uoregon.edu>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, May 05, 1999 at 02:15:41PM -0700, Doug White wrote:
> On Tue, 4 May 1999, Mark Ovens wrote:
> 
> > > > Should I expect there to be any differences between the same version
> > > > of gcc under 2.2.8 and 3.1, other than one outputting aout files and
> > > > the other outputting ELF?.
> > > > 
> > > > I have a (large) program that compiled and linked fine using gcc 2.8.1
> > > > (*not* the standard gcc used for building the system). After u/g to
> > > > 3.1 this program wouldn't run as some of the required aout libs are
> > > > not installed. I installed gcc-2.8.1 from the packages on the 3.1 CD
> > > > and recompiled my program but I get errors, mainly from the linker
> > > > (undefined symbols etc).
> 
> Why don't you rebuild the required libraries to ELF?
> 

Why should I have too? This system was installed from scratch, it's
all ELF (I've file(1)'d all the libs I can find and they're all
ELF, except the aout compat stuff).

> > > We had to move the a.out libraries to another area and set up ldconfig to
> > > cache them independently.  If you didn't install the 2.2 compatibility
> > > distribution then you're missing those libraries.
> > > 
> > > The libs should be in /lib-path/aout.
> > > 
> > 
> > Yes, I know. It's mainly the xview libs that are missing (not part
> > of the base dist. or the 2.2 compat stuff) that is why I decided
> > to re-compile it all as ELF.
> > 
> > I'm just interested as to why the same version of gcc should,
> > seemingly behave differently under 2.2.8 and 3.1
> 
> It's not, it's acting as it always had.  You just have new libraries to
> consider.
> 

What new libs exactly? 

I think I may know what I've screwed up. Before I installed gcc-2.8.1
I tried egcs-1.1.1. That gave more errors, so I then installed
gcc-2.8.1. I've since read some docs at Cygnus' website that mention
that egcs includes a new libstdc++ (?) whereas gcc-2.8.1 doesn't.
Also pkg_info -v egcs-1.1.1 mentioned something about moving some
libs "to avoid conflict with the stock compiler". I've pkg_deleted
both egcs and gcc and the re-installed gcc. I'm now re-compiling
my job (it'll take about 1-1/4 hours to compile the ~6000 source
files) so I'm keeping my fingers crossed that it'll work this time.

> Doug White                               
> Internet:  dwhite@resnet.uoregon.edu    | FreeBSD: The Power to Serve
> http://gladstone.uoregon.edu/~dwhite    | www.freebsd.org
> 
> 

-- 
      FreeBSD - The Power To Serve http://www.freebsd.org
      My Webpage http://www.users.globalnet.co.uk/~markov
_______________________________________________________________
Mark Ovens, CNC Apps Engineer, Radan Computational Ltd. Bath UK
CAD/CAM solutions for Sheetmetal Working Industry
mailto:marko@uk.radan.com                  http://www.radan.com



To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?19990505235002.C2189>