On 2 June 2011 12:21, Bill Cunningham wrote: > Jonathan Wakely wrote: > >>> No. Although I didn't manually use the switches with gcc to find gmp >>> mpc or mpfc. The configure script seemed to me atleast to be able to >>> find those libraries I put in /usr/local. No when compiling mpc I >>> believe it was it needed to know where gmp was. The script needed >>> help there. gmp mpc and mpfc were the only things gcc to my >>> knowledge needed to compile and run. >> >> There's a difference between configure being able to find the >> libraries to link an executable and the dynamic linker being able to >> find those libraris to *run* an executable. >> >> If /usr/local/lib is not in your ldconfig cache then it will not find >> libgmp.so etc. so you will need to reconfigure ldconfig, or set >> LD_LIBRARY_PATH. >> >> Of course since you don't know what the actual error was this is all >> just wild speculation. You need to know what the error was and if it >> told you to look in config.log, which would have more information. >> >> Try looking in the build directory for $target/libgcc/config.log which >> I suspect will show that ld.so couldn't find one of libgmp.so, >> libmpfr.so or libmpc.so > > Isn't the dynamic linker, ld.so and ld-linux.so2 the same thing? Yes. But ld is not the same thing as ld.so and my point is that ld might have been able to find the libraries, but ld.so could not. But this still seems like a waste of time until you know what the actual error was. I still suggest looking in $target/libgcc/config.log to see if it's in there.
