Peering over the [cutting] edge
didbaba at free.fr
Fri Mar 23 07:34:36 PST 2001
Le Thu, Mar 22, 2001 at 09:09:46PM +0100 , Neven Has écrivait :
> > My question is : what is the sed command to change
> > `$(CC) -print-file-name=cpp | \
> > sed 's|/cpp$$||'`
> > in
> > /usr/bin
> [ assuming s/in/to/ and that you didn't find a sed guru yet ;) ]
With a little help from Simon Perreault, I have a solution :)
sed s/\`\$\(CC\).-print-file-name=cpp.\|../"\/usr\/bin"/ glibc-2.2.2/sunrpc > file1 && sed s/\s*sed.\'\s\|.cpp\$\$\|\|\'\`// file1 > makefile && rm file1
I want to do that because I believe that it was gcc 2.95.3 fault. Apparently not.
# gcc -print-file-name=cpp
I would like to see /usr/bin/cpp, but I just see cpp.
I understand why. The command is -print-file-name=LIBRARY
and /usr/bin/cpp is a binary, but I succeed in compiling glibc by replacing /usr/lib/gcc-lib/*/cpp by this binary.
So my question :
Is there a difference beetween the cpp binary who live in /usr/bin, and the cpp library who live in /usr/lib/gcc-lib...
(not tha same # ls cpp, but the same # file cpp) If it's tha same, why there is two places (why not a link), if it's not the same why do they got the same name (in gcc-2.95.2). Why do they change from cpp to cpp0, to distinguish ?
If you're bored with my questions, maybe you could give me some reference.
> "cpp -print-file-name=cpp" should work and give you the full absolute name:
> # cpp -print-file-name=cpp
> # cpp -print-file-name=cpp0
> Just check if "/usr/lib/cpp" and "/lib/cpp" are not broken links.
> If they are, and point to "cpp" instead of "cpp0", fix them.
> The alternative is to have cpp -> cpp0 in "/usr/lib/gcc-lib/*/2.95.3/".
> All this, if I understand your problems correctly. :)
I'll make the ln instead of sed command.
powered by LinuxFromScratch 2.4
Unsubscribe: send email to lfs-discuss-request at linuxfromscratch.org
and put unsubscribe in the subject header of the message
More information about the lfs-dev