diff options
Diffstat (limited to 'FAQ.in')
| -rw-r--r-- | FAQ.in | 40 |
1 files changed, 21 insertions, 19 deletions
@@ -69,7 +69,7 @@ EGCS and with GCC 2.8.1. See ?exception for details. ?? When I try to compile glibc I get only error messages. What's wrong? -{UD} You definitely need GNU make to translate GNU libc. No other make +{UD} You definitely need GNU make to build GNU libc. No other make program has the needed functionality. We recommend version GNU make version 3.75 or 3.77. Versions before 3.75 @@ -168,7 +168,7 @@ when using the library do not need to match. The GNU C library runs without problems on kernels that are older than the kernel headers used. The other way round (compiling the GNU C library with old kernel headers and running on a recent kernel) does not necessarily work. For example you can't use -new kernel features when using old kernel headers for compiling the GNU C +new kernel features if you used old kernel headers to compile the GNU C library. {ZW} Even if you are using a 2.0 kernel on your machine, we recommend you @@ -282,18 +282,18 @@ with a library that was build this way, we advise you to rebuild the library without --enable-omitfp. If the problem vanishes consider tracking the problem down and report it as compiler failure. -Since a library build with --enable-omitfp is undebuggable on most systems, -debuggable libraries are also built - you can use it by appending "_g" to +Since a library built with --enable-omitfp is undebuggable on most systems, +debuggable libraries are also built - you can use them by appending "_g" to the library names. The compilation of these extra libraries and the compiler optimizations slow down the build process and need more disk space. -?? I get failures during `make check'. What shall I do? +?? I get failures during `make check'. What should I do? -{AJ} The testsuite should compile and run cleanly on your system, every -failure should be looked into. Depending on the failure I wouldn't advise -installing the library at all. +{AJ} The testsuite should compile and run cleanly on your system; every +failure should be looked into. Depending on the failures, you probably +should not install the library at all. You should consider using the `glibcbug' script to report the failure, providing as much detail as possible. If you run a test directly, please @@ -303,13 +303,15 @@ command line which failed and run the test from the subdirectory for this test in the sources. There are some failures which are not directly related to the GNU libc: -- Some compiler produce buggy code. The egcs 1.1 release should be ok. gcc - 2.8.1 might cause some failures, gcc 2.7.2.x is so buggy, that explicit - checks have been used so that you can't build with it. +- Some compilers produce buggy code. No compiler gets single precision + complex numbers correct on Alpha. Otherwise, the egcs 1.1 release should be + ok; gcc 2.8.1 might cause some failures; gcc 2.7.2.x is so buggy that + explicit checks have been used so that you can't build with it. - The kernel might have bugs. For example on Linux/Alpha 2.0.34 the floating point handling has quite a number of bugs and therefore most of the test cases in the math subdirectory will fail. Linux 2.2 has - fixes for the floating point support on Alpha. + fixes for the floating point support on Alpha. The Linux/SPARC kernel has + also some bugs in the FPU emulation code (as of Linux 2.2.0). ?? What is symbol versioning good for? Do I need it? @@ -318,15 +320,15 @@ changes. One version of an interface might have been introduced in a previous version of the GNU C library but the interface or the semantics of the function has been changed in the meantime. For binary compatibility with the old library, a newer library needs to still have the old interface -for old programs. On the other hand new programs should use the new +for old programs. On the other hand, new programs should use the new interface. Symbol versioning is the solution for this problem. The GNU -libc version 2.1 uses by default symbol versioning if the binutils support -it. +libc version 2.1 uses symbol versioning by default if the installed binutils +supports it. -We don't advise to build without symbol versioning since you lose binary -compatibility if you do - for ever! The binary compatibility you lose is -not only against the previous version of the GNU libc (version 2.0) but also -against future versions. +We don't advise building without symbol versioning, since you lose binary +compatibility - forever! The binary compatibility you lose is not only +against the previous version of the GNU libc (version 2.0) but also against +all future versions. ? Installation and configuration issues |