On Tue, 2014-05-06 at 23:55 +0200, Jonas Müller wrote: > - Use an ancient x86_64 glibc setup, something like glibc 2.3 should > do the job > - Use the most ancient libstdc++ still yielding a libstdc++.so.6 (i.e. > libstdc++ from GCC 3.4.0) > - Use the most advanced GCC which is 4.9.0 currently (without its > included libstdc++), to gain the most out of modern optimization > techniques I'm not an expert on ABI issues but it seems unlikely to me that this will be a successful strategy. > Is this practically possible? I've tried using a CentOS 4.9 based Personally I wouldn't bother with anything before CentOS 5.0, but YMMV. It's trivial to do this with the modern GCC, just add --sysroot=<path> to your toolchain invocations, where <path> is the path of the root of a copy of the system headers and libraries you want to compile against. > In such a case, I might as well just -static-libstdc++. That is the right answer. You can consider adding -static-libgcc as well. > I'm really trying to create a binary that does not require any > dragging along or statically linking to libstdc++. Why not? If you're going to statically link against boost, gmp, etc. then why not libstdc++ as well? It's far and away the simplest and most reliable solution to your problem.
