From owner-freebsd-hackers Mon Apr 8 05:50:01 1996 Return-Path: owner-hackers Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.3/8.7.3) id FAA24330 for hackers-outgoing; Mon, 8 Apr 1996 05:50:01 -0700 (PDT) Received: from spooky.rwwa.com (rwwa.com [198.115.177.3]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.3/8.7.3) with SMTP id FAA24298 for ; Mon, 8 Apr 1996 05:49:58 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost.rwwa.com (localhost.rwwa.com [127.0.0.1]) by spooky.rwwa.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with SMTP id IAA03912 for ; Mon, 8 Apr 1996 08:49:35 -0400 Message-Id: <199604081249.IAA03912@spooky.rwwa.com> X-Authentication-Warning: spooky.rwwa.com: Host localhost.rwwa.com didn't use HELO protocol X-Mailer: exmh version 1.6.5 12/11/95 To: hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: GNU binutils port In-reply-to: Your message of "Sat, 06 Apr 1996 16:29:05 MST." <199604062329.QAA26137@rover.village.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Date: Mon, 08 Apr 1996 08:49:34 -0400 From: Robert Withrow Sender: owner-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk > : Out of curiosity, why is that (both of thats that is... ;-) > > Because binutils doesn't support FreeBSD's shared libraries. Also, > gcc is bundled with FreeBSD, so there is no need to have it as a port. As you noticed, cross building is a legitimate reason for wanting both gcc and binutils to compile on FreeBSD. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- Robert Withrow, Tel: +1 617 592 8935, Net: witr@rwwa.COM