If you have SCO OpenServer 5.0.0, you should install TLS597 after installing the GNU dev sys. This corrects several problems with the system startup and teardown files. This is believed to be unnecessary on systems that identify themselves as anything greater than 3.2v5.0.0 with a uname -X.
The cut of the installable images for the 95.4b version as it appears
on Skunkware '96 was faulty. You can should update to the 95.4c version
of the gds that corrects this problem. It's available at
Robert's Master Site
or
http://www.sco.com/SkunkWare/Updates/gds/libg++-2.7.2.tar.gz
When attempting to build a .so, just forget about the -shared flag to gcc. It does Bad Things. If you use it, you get something like the following :
$ gcc -b elf -shared sub1.o sub2.o -o libsub.so relocations referenced from file(s): /usr/ccs/lib/crt.o sub1.o sub2.o fatal error: relocations remain against allocatable but non-writable section: .textInstead, use the following flags (similar to what you would do with SCO CC) :
SCO CC GCC
============== ===============
Make things to go into .so
-belf -KPIC -belf -fpic
Make a .so
-belf -G -KPIC -belf -G -fpic
Use a .so
-dy -KPIC -belf
FSF Version 2.7.anything doesn't support SCO OpenServer. My binary kits are built around the Cygnus quarterly releases, not the stock FSF version. These two trees closely track each other, but do leapfrog from time to time.
I have eyeballed the diffs between 2.7.2 and the underlying version I used and remain unconvinced that there are any significant differences that affect x86 targets.
FSF 2.7.2.1 still doesn't support SCO OpenServer, but does fix some esoteric problems with wild (-O3 and up) optimization levels on x86 targets.
If you just really can't stand having those version numbers being different thatn the FSF releases, your options in increasing level of masochism, are:
While I've had a lot of good feedback from all over the world from people that have found this tool useful, I've also had one or two people get really abusive with me about it. If you think you've found a problem boil it to the bare minimum code necessary to recreate it, include self-contained source, expected output, the compiler invocation used, and so on. Post the request for help in comp.unix.sco.programmer. I will most likely see the post there.
The surest way to not get me to help with your question is to name some nifty 50 Gb package from the Net and tell me "it doesn't work."
Being rude with me isn't going to help your case either. I'll just give you a refund on what you paid me for the package. :-)