From owner-freebsd-hackers Sat Apr 15 11:24:32 1995 Return-Path: hackers-owner Received: (from majordom@localhost) by freefall.cdrom.com (8.6.10/8.6.6) id LAA19393 for hackers-outgoing; Sat, 15 Apr 1995 11:24:32 -0700 Received: from bigdipper.iagi.net (bigdipper.iagi.net [198.6.14.10]) by freefall.cdrom.com (8.6.10/8.6.6) with ESMTP id LAA19387 for ; Sat, 15 Apr 1995 11:24:28 -0700 Received: (from adhir@localhost) by bigdipper.iagi.net (8.6.8/8.6.6) id OAA24545 for hackers@freebsd.org; Sat, 15 Apr 1995 14:24:25 -0400 Date: Sat, 15 Apr 1995 14:24:25 -0400 From: "Alok K. Dhir" Message-Id: <199504151824.OAA24545@bigdipper.iagi.net> To: hackers@FreeBSD.org Subject: (fwd) Re: Xwindow Probs - Help - AGAIN... Newsgroups: comp.os.386bsd.questions Sender: hackers-owner@FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk Here's something from the newsgroup that sounds like a potential problem - is this something that should be addressed? In article <3meakh$ql4@fu-berlin.de>, Thomas Graichen wrote: > >but care must be taken - if the libgcc.so.* is in /usr/lib - each new binary >will be compiled with it by default - not a good idea - it had to be kept in >a dir whioch is searched by ld.so but not by gcc and ld - t But whether libgcc.so.261.0 is placed in /usr/lib by the installer or by the user makes no difference then. If gcc 2.6.3 really does try to link with libgcc.so.261.0 instead of libgcc.a then that's a different problem. -- Brian ("Though this be madness, yet there is method in't") Tao taob@gate.sinica.edu.tw <-- work ........ play --> taob@io.org -- Alok K. Dhir Internet Access Group, Inc. adhir@iagi.net (301) 652-0484 Fax: (301) 652-0649 http://www.iagi.net