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] |
Steve: Does a statically-linked application work? b.g. On Thu, Apr 25, 2002 at 02:39:17PM -0500, Cameron, Steve wrote: > > > > > Since your kernel appears to work, could it be a broken glibc? > > > > b.g. > > > > Hard to say. On the target system, I was using the glibc > that came with the "working gcc", not the glibc that I built > (and not the one my app was compiled against). That can't > be exactly right. > > Tried statically linking with my glibc... got "Illegal instruction" > _immediately_. Well, is my glibc bad? yes, I guess so. > But why? because my compiler is bad? Or some other reason. > > Also tried running my program dynamically linked but invoking > my new glibc ld.so.1 directly. Also gets "illegal instruction" > immeidately. Running ld.so.1 with no arguments ececutes enough > to print out a help message and exit though. > > In my user app using the old glibc, I get the "illegal instruction" > during a function call from one function to another in the same .c > file, which seems unlikely to be the result of a glibc problem, > (though possible). Using the new glibc, I get illegal instruction > in glibc (or ld.so.1, perhaps) but this could be a symptom of the > same compiler problem that causes the illegal instruction in my > user app. > > -- steve > > > -- Bill Gatliff bgat@billgatliff.com ------ 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] |