Re: question about -print-search-dirs

2006-09-12 Thread Peter O'Gorman
On Sep 13, 2006, at 3:57 AM, Kate Minola wrote: The reason I ask is that libtool (or more precisely the m4 macro AC_LIBTOOL_SYS_DYNAMIC_LINKER in libtool.m4) uses "gcc -print-search-dirs" to set sys_lib_search_path_spec. But if gcc is in -m64 mode but -print-search-dirs is only listing -m32 l

Re: question about -print-search-dirs

2006-09-12 Thread Kate Minola
On 9/12/06, Daniel Jacobowitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Looking at the original example, Kate, what exactly were you confused about? If it was the "/../lib64" suffix, those are added _after_ the list of directories to search are decided. They're added when we consider whether the user asked f

Re: question about -print-search-dirs

2006-09-12 Thread Daniel Jacobowitz
On Tue, Sep 12, 2006 at 08:58:40AM -0700, Ian Lance Taylor wrote: > "Kate Minola" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > For both lists of libraries, the directories exist. So I don't understand > > your answer. > > In that case, I don't understand either. It does work as expected for > me. I shoul

Re: question about -print-search-dirs

2006-09-12 Thread Ian Lance Taylor
"Kate Minola" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > For both lists of libraries, the directories exist. So I don't understand > your answer. In that case, I don't understand either. It does work as expected for me. I should note that there is one general exception: /lib and /usr/lib will not be passed

Re: question about -print-search-dirs

2006-09-12 Thread Kate Minola
Ian, For both lists of libraries, the directories exist. So I don't understand your answer. Kate Minola University of Maryland, College Park On 11 Sep 2006 13:21:12 -0700, Ian Lance Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: "Kate Minola" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > I guess I would have expected th

Re: question about -print-search-dirs

2006-09-11 Thread Ian Lance Taylor
"Kate Minola" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > I guess I would have expected that the two lists of libraries would be the > same, > or perhaps that the second list would be contained in the first. But > this does not > seem to be the case. > > What am I missing? gcc only generates a -L option for

question about -print-search-dirs

2006-09-11 Thread Kate Minola
Perhaps a kind person would explain what -print-search-dirs is printing. The manual entry is not very enlightening. When I do %gcc -print search-dirs I get output of which the "libraries=" line lists the following libraries libraries: =/usr/local/gcc-4.1.1/x86_64-Linux/lib/gcc/x86_64-unknown-