This is the mail archive of the crossgcc@sources.redhat.com mailing list for the crossgcc project.

See the CrossGCC FAQ for lots more information.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: Cross Compiling Joys, Woes, and Insanity


Dan Kegel wrote:

I certainly came close to losing my mind while writing my script,
so your experience corelates well with mine :-)

The script in all theory should work fine...Once I force glibc to submit to the inevitibility that it will build (Hey, it never hurts to threaten a software package...)



Hmm.  Other people have occasionally run into problems like this, see e.g.
http://www.x86-64.org/lists/discuss/msg03853.html
ooh, and this one:
http://mail.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-glibc/2003-07/msg00076.html
which says
"This indicates an interesting little build problem with current glibc,
as it would appear that you can't build a shared glibc without already
having glibc installed (crti.o is part of glibc).  A likely workaround
is to first build glibc with --disable-shared, install, then rebuild."

No idea if that's accurate, or why I never ran into it.

I'll give the rebuilding idea a shot. I have fussed with glibc once where I had to half-build gcc, install; half build glibc, install; finish gcc, install; finish glibc, install; rebuild gcc, install; rebuild glibc, install. That was not fun. It worked in the end, but did absolutely nothing (meager attempts at a sparc64-toolchain (64-bit)).


I'm open to trying a dual-build cycle of glibc, hopefully I will not have to resort to using make -k, but who knows. Wicked are the ways of the glibc gremlins.

I wonder if a shared glibc is even necessary. If the static glibc works...hey... Have to try and if sucessful, see where to go from there.


In any case, it would probably be a good idea for you to
understand how shlib.lds is generated, and what it's for...
- Dan

I'm convinced it's an issue on i686. As I mentioned in my mail, the shlib.lds file issue didn't occur on a sparc64 box, indicating slight differences. I do recall once, when I last tried to build an i686->mips cross-compiler manually, that a similar syntax error occurred in "ld.so.lds", and a google search revealed that this error occured if the gcc-bootstrap compiler was built with --disable-shared. This specific issue was only on i686. Sparc, the build worked flawlessly, and I had a functional sparc->mips cross-compiler, until it fell into disuse and I deleted it. I think it was gcc-3.2.3 and glibc-2.3.2, so it was fairly modern.


Either way, I'll tinker with the dual-glibc build concept and report back successes or failures. Maybe I'll be brave enough to bother the libc-alpha ML about it and see what happens.

Thanks,


--Kumba


--
"Such is oft the course of deeds that move the wheels of the world: small hands do them because they must, while the eyes of the great are elsewhere." --Elrond



------ Want more information? See the CrossGCC FAQ, http://www.objsw.com/CrossGCC/ Want to unsubscribe? Send a note to crossgcc-unsubscribe@sources.redhat.com


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]