This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the glibc project.
Re: Build failure of 2.2.3 and 2.2.4pre2 on sparc-unknown-linux
- To: Ben Collins <bcollins at debian dot org>
- Subject: Re: Build failure of 2.2.3 and 2.2.4pre2 on sparc-unknown-linux
- From: Nix <nix at esperi dot demon dot co dot uk>
- Date: 06 Aug 2001 04:27:31 +0100
- Cc: libc-alpha at sources dot redhat dot com
- References: <email@example.com> <20010805092206.C30381@visi.net>
On Sun, 5 Aug 2001, Ben Collins stipulated:
> On Sun, Aug 05, 2001 at 01:04:29PM +0100, Nix wrote:
>> /mnt/tmp/build-glibc/elf/ld-linux.so.2 --library-path /mnt/tmp/build-glibc:/mnt/tmp/build-glibc/math:/mnt/tmp/build-glibc/elf:/mnt/tmp/build-glibc/dlfcn:/mnt/tmp/build-glibc/nss:/mnt/tmp/build-glibc/nis:/mnt/tmp/build-glibc/rt:/mnt/tmp/build-glibc/resolv:/mnt/tmp/build-glibc/crypt:/mnt/tmp/build-glibc/linuxthreads /mnt/tmp/build-glibc/sunrpc/rpcgen -Y gcc -E -c rpcsvc/bootparam_prot.x -o /mnt/tmp/build-glibc/sunrpc/xbootparam_prot.T
>> make: *** [/mnt/tmp/build-glibc/sunrpc/xbootparam_prot.stmp] Segmentation fault
>> make: Leaving directory `/mnt/tmp/glibc-2.2.4/sunrpc'
> This is surely a toolchain bug. I just built 2.2.4-pre2 for sparc-linux
> using gcc-2.95.4, and binutils 126.96.36.199.7, with no test case failures.
Gold dust; tool version numbers that work! ;)
I've been finding your diffs (for the Debian libc) damned useful, but of
course they don't say what version of binutils is needed, and
binutils-188.8.131.52.24 is present in unstable, which led me astray...
... but, hell, downgrading binutils didn't help; neither did omitting
--enable-omitfp as Andreas suggested. Unless the downgraded binutils was
rendered just as broken by being assembled by the broken one (which is,
I suppose, *possible*) then it's unclear what's going on.
(And, furthermore, even with the GCC atexit patch, I'm still unable to
use atexit; unresolved symbol. The entire reason for my rebuilding libc
in the first place was to see if rebuilding it with a compiler with the
atexit patch would render atexit visible again...)
Someone Up There hates me.
>> I've tried 2.2.4-from-CVS as of just past midnight GMT 2001-08-05 (same
>> as 2.2.4pre2 as far as I can tell); I've tried GCC-2.95.3 and
>> GCC-2.95.4-cvs-head (to get the atexit patch), and I'm using
>> binutils-184.108.40.206.24; I've tried with `-mcpu=v8 -mtune=ultrasparc' and
> Isn't the latest binutils having issues on sparc-linux? I haven't
Yes, but they had purportedly been fixed by
2001-07-02 Jakub Jelinek <firstname.lastname@example.org>
* sysdeps/sparc/sparc32/dl-machine.h (elf_machine_rela): Handle
R_SPARC_UA16 and R_SPARC_UA32.
* sysdeps/sparc/sparc64/dl-machine.h (elf_machine_rela): Likewise.
but it seems (since it works for you and all that differs is the
binutils version) that this doesn't fix all the issues :(
> upgraded my binutils in awhile, since last I checked, there were
> problems of some sort.
... and even with it downgraded, there are still problems. :(
I'll grab the binutils .deb file and extract the binaries from it, and
see if that magic fairy dust helps. (Desperate hopeless wriggling?
`It's all about bossing computers around. Users have to say "please".
Programmers get to say "do what I want NOW or the hard disk gets it".'
-- Richard Heathfield on the nature of programming