This is the mail archive of the crossgcc@sourceware.org mailing list for the crossgcc project.
See crosstool-NG 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] |
Hi, Yan The new patch is attathed. I remove the "-static" option, because I have tested, and the result shows that the "-all-staic" is enough to create the static toolchain. If "-static" is places ahead of "-all-static", the later one will no take the effect, and the static toolchain build will fail at binutils stage. Would you please have a review? On 2014-07-08 22:09:54, Yann E. MORIN wrote: > Date: Tue, 8 Jul 2014 22:09:54 +0200 > From: "Yann E. MORIN" <yann.morin.1998@free.fr> > To: "brock.zheng" <goodmenzy@gmail.com> > Cc: crosstool-NG ML <crossgcc@sourceware.org> > Subject: Re: [PATCH] Fixup the static toolchain build problem > User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.22 (2013-10-16) > > Brock, All, > > On 2014-07-08 20:29 +0800, brock.zheng spake thusly: > > When build binutils, libtool tried to translate -lfl to /usr/lib/libfl.so > > But when change to "LDFLAGS=-all-static -static", libtool works fine. > > -lfl will be translated to /usr/lib/libfl.a > > Here are a few comments on your patch. > > First you forgot to add your Signed-oof-by to the patch, so we can't use > it. See: > http://crosstool-ng.org/git/crosstool-ng/tree/docs/7%20-%20Contributing%20to%20crosstool-NG.txt > > Second, in a previous mail, you said: > > I have checked the libtool script, and found that the following option > -all-static > -static > -static-libtool-libs > is processed in a strange way. If any one of those three option appears > firstly in the cmdline, all others > will be neglected. Our LDFLAGS is ".... -static -all-static -o", so the > -static option takes the real effect, > and the -all-static has no useage actually! that is the cause of the > failure. > > So, if only the first option is in effect, why do we still cary the > -static ? > > Otherwise, I'm not opposed to the idea. ;-) > > Regards, > Yann E. MORIN. > > > --- > > scripts/build/binutils/binutils.sh | 2 +- > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > diff --git a/scripts/build/binutils/binutils.sh b/scripts/build/binutils/binutils.sh > > index b6207be..cc57b5a 100644 > > --- a/scripts/build/binutils/binutils.sh > > +++ b/scripts/build/binutils/binutils.sh > > @@ -220,7 +220,7 @@ do_binutils_backend() { > > "${CT_BINUTILS_EXTRA_CONFIG_ARRAY[@]}" > > > > if [ "${static_build}" = "y" ]; then > > - extra_make_flags+=("LDFLAGS=-static -all-static") > > + extra_make_flags+=("LDFLAGS=-all-static -static") > > CT_DoLog EXTRA "Prepare binutils for static build" > > CT_DoExecLog ALL make ${JOBSFLAGS} configure-host > > fi > > -- > > 2.0.1 > > > > -- > .-----------------.--------------------.------------------.--------------------. > | Yann E. MORIN | Real-Time Embedded | /"\ ASCII RIBBON | Erics' conspiracy: | > | +33 662 376 056 | Software Designer | \ / CAMPAIGN | ___ | > | +33 223 225 172 `------------.-------: X AGAINST | \e/ There is no | > | http://ymorin.is-a-geek.org/ | _/*\_ | / \ HTML MAIL | v conspiracy. | > '------------------------------^-------^------------------^--------------------' > > -- > For unsubscribe information see http://sourceware.org/lists.html#faq > -- Brock Zheng <yzheng@techyauld.com> é ç åääçèèçæååæéåå åäåææåäåæèè8åäåæèäå21åæåææèååäåååïéçï100094ï
>From ba038d4ef1a4c0691a7cc695d1a48c1593417662 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Brock Zheng <goodmenlinux@gmail.com> Date: Fri, 11 Jul 2014 09:04:08 +0800 Subject: [PATCH] binutils: Fixup the static toolchain build problem When try to build the static toolchain, binutils failed. I have checked the libtool script, and found that the following option -all-static -static -static-libtool-libs are processed in a strange way. If any one of those three options appears firstly in the cmdline, all others will be neglected. Our LDFLAGS is ".... -static -all-static -o", so the -static option takes the real effect, and the -all-static has no useage actually! that is the cause of the failure. Signed-off-by: Brock Zheng <goodmenlinux@gmail.com> --- scripts/build/binutils/binutils.sh | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/scripts/build/binutils/binutils.sh b/scripts/build/binutils/binutils.sh index b6207be..a0d9208 100644 --- a/scripts/build/binutils/binutils.sh +++ b/scripts/build/binutils/binutils.sh @@ -220,7 +220,7 @@ do_binutils_backend() { "${CT_BINUTILS_EXTRA_CONFIG_ARRAY[@]}" if [ "${static_build}" = "y" ]; then - extra_make_flags+=("LDFLAGS=-static -all-static") + extra_make_flags+=("LDFLAGS=-all-static") CT_DoLog EXTRA "Prepare binutils for static build" CT_DoExecLog ALL make ${JOBSFLAGS} configure-host fi -- 2.0.1
-- For unsubscribe information see http://sourceware.org/lists.html#faq
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |