[uClibc]Re: bogus change to gcc-uClibc?
Erik Andersen
andersen at codepoet.org
Mon Feb 25 08:51:48 UTC 2002
On Mon Feb 25, 2002 at 04:22:53PM +0900, Miles Bader wrote:
> Miles Bader <miles at lsi.nec.co.jp> writes:
> > It looks like this will result in any `-Wl,...' options the user
> > specifies not being passed to gcc! That's surely wrong...
>
> I tested the new version, and indeed, it breaks my builds. I removed
> the lines that ignore `-Wl,...', and now everything works great (for me).
Yipe! Yes, that is a mistake. I used to have two check for
static linking -- one for the -Wl version. I realized I could
combine the two, but I accidentally left the -Wl check in. I'll
also let -v be passed on to gcc. I'd mostly just disabled that
while debugging. Fixing...
-Erik
--
Erik B. Andersen http://codepoet-consulting.com/
--This message was written using 73% post-consumer electrons--
More information about the uClibc
mailing list