[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: time-signature-single-digit.ly and time-signature-single-digit.ly do
From: |
Masamichi HOSODA |
Subject: |
Re: time-signature-single-digit.ly and time-signature-single-digit.ly don't have \version |
Date: |
Wed, 25 Feb 2015 00:41:06 +0900 (JST) |
>> I've received your log file.
>>
>> The log file includes following messages.
>>
>> ```
>> configure: error: in
>> `/home/gub/NewGub/gub/target/linux-x86/build/cross/gcc-core-4.9.2/i686-linux/libgcc':
>> configure: error: cannot compute suffix of object files: cannot
>> compile
>> See `config.log' for more details.
>> ```
>>
>> Would you show me the config.log?
>
>
> Attached are the config.log from the directory above and from the
> gcc-core-4.9.2 directory.
Thank you for config.log files.
Probably, when build / host and target are just same, gcc building is failed.
In my environment (Ubuntu 64bit),
To build linux-x86::cross/gcc-core:
checking build system type... x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu
checking host system type... x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu
checking target system type... i686-pc-linux-gnu
To build linux-64::cross/gcc-core:
checking build system type... x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu
checking host system type... x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu
checking target system type... x86_64-pc-linux-gnu
Therefore, build / host and target are different.
In your environment (Ubuntu 32bit),
To build linux-x86::cross/gcc-core:
configure:2322: checking build system type
configure:2336: result: i686-pc-linux-gnu
configure:2383: checking host system type
configure:2396: result: i686-pc-linux-gnu
configure:2416: checking target system type
configure:2429: result: i686-pc-linux-gnu
Therefor, build / host and target are just same.
I've fixed this issue in my branch.
https://github.com/trueroad/gub/tree/gcc-4.9
Would you update GUB and try again?
- Re: time-signature-single-digit.ly and time-signature-single-digit.ly don't have \version, (continued)
- Re: time-signature-single-digit.ly and time-signature-single-digit.ly don't have \version, Phil Holmes, 2015/02/22
- Re: time-signature-single-digit.ly and time-signature-single-digit.ly don't have \version, Masamichi HOSODA, 2015/02/22
- Re: time-signature-single-digit.ly and time-signature-single-digit.ly don't have \version, Phil Holmes, 2015/02/23
- Re: time-signature-single-digit.ly and time-signature-single-digit.ly don't have \version, Masamichi HOSODA, 2015/02/23
- Re: time-signature-single-digit.ly and time-signature-single-digit.ly don't have \version, Phil Holmes, 2015/02/23
- Re: time-signature-single-digit.ly and time-signature-single-digit.ly don't have \version, Masamichi HOSODA, 2015/02/24
- Re: time-signature-single-digit.ly and time-signature-single-digit.ly don't have \version, Phil Holmes, 2015/02/24
- Re: time-signature-single-digit.ly and time-signature-single-digit.ly don't have \version,
Masamichi HOSODA <=
- Re: time-signature-single-digit.ly and time-signature-single-digit.ly don't have \version, Phil Holmes, 2015/02/24
- GUB updates: was: Re: time-signature-single-digit.ly and time-signature-single-digit.ly don't have \version, Phil Holmes, 2015/02/25