Powerpc-eabi, bootstrap compilers...

Joe Sislow flynn@cosmodog.com
Fri Oct 19 10:17:00 GMT 2001


Aha...yes, you did!  How not RTFP (posts) of me!  Thank you...I will try that!

Jean-Sebastien Trottier wrote:

> That's exactly why I suggested using LD_RUN_PATH setenv'd to /usr/local/lib when creating your compiler
> and tools. it has the same effect than -rpath
>
> Joe Sislow wrote:
>
> > Kai Ruottu wrote:
> >
> > > Rodney, here are something for you too...
> > >
> > > Joe Sislow wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Joe Sislow wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Well, what it turns out was going on was that my glibc stuff in /lib was version 2.2.2, and
> > > > > I had installed 2.2.4 to /usr/local/lib.  So, I just set the LD_LIBRARY_PATH to
> > > > > /usr/local/lib, and they all run just fine!  BTW, I avoided installing them to /usr as many
> > > > > of the FAQ's on installing glibc said it might be a bad idea.
> > > > >
> > > > > Thanks all!  You've been very helpful!
> > > > >
> > > > Well, it wasn't that easy.  That DOES get the binutils working, but it proceeds to mess a
> > > > LOT of other things up.  I've been using:
> > > >
> > > > binutils-2.11.2
> > > > glibc-2.2.4
> > > > gcc-2.95.3
> > > >
> > > > My system seems to have glibc 2.2.2 installed (found by checking /lib/libc.so.6).  It seems
> > > > that the binutils I'm using wants 2.2.3 or more...how do I get IT to use the 2.2.4 I have in
> > > > /usr/local without fubaring everything else?  When I set LD_LIBRARY_PATH to /usr/local/lib,
> > > > things start crashing all over the place.  Ideas?
> > >
> > >  Haven't tried this, but my thought is that those '-dynamic-linker <libdir>' and '-rpath <libdir>'
> > > options given to the linker should control where the produced executables will search the dynamic
> > > linker file and the shared libs (first) at run-time :
> > >
> > > --------------------------- clip ---------------------------------
> > > ld --help
> > > Usage: ld [options] file...
> > > Options:
> > >   -a KEYWORD                  Shared library control for HP/UX compatibility
> > >   -A ARCH, --architecture ARCH
> > >                               Set architecture
> > > <snip>
> > >
> > >   --demangle                  Demangle symbol names
> > >   --dynamic-linker PROGRAM    Set the dynamic linker to use   <-------------
> > >   --embedded-relocs           Generate embedded relocs
> > >
> > > <snip>
> > >
> > >   --retain-symbols-file FILE  Keep only symbols listed in FILE
> > >   -rpath PATH                 Set runtime shared library search path <------
> > >   -rpath-link PATH            Set link time shared library search path
> > > --------------------------- clip ---------------------------------
> > >
> > >  The '-rpath-link' then tells where the '.so' stuff will be searched (first)
> > > at link-time...
> > >
> > >  I'm still searching a better way to look at these 'hard-wired' things in the
> > > executables, but the 'objdump -p' is now my way to see the needed shared-libs
> > > and 'strings' (aren't there any better way?) to see the 'hard-wired' dynamic-
> > > linker and its place.
> > >
> > >  Anyway using the '-dynamic-linker' and '-rpath' to set non-default search
> > > paths using something like:
> > >
> > > --------------------------- clip ---------------------------------
> > >   gcc-ppc-linux -v -Os \
> > >   -Wl,-dynamic-linker,/usr/local/lib/ld.so.1,-rpath,/usr/local/lib \
> > >   -o tst_ppc-linux.x tprintf.c
> > > --------------------------- clip ---------------------------------
> > >
> > > one then gets with 'strings' :
> > >
> > > --------------------------- clip ---------------------------------
> > >   strings tst_ppc-linux.x | less
> > >   /usr/local/lib/ld.so.1   <-----------
> > >   __gmon_start__
> > >   libc.so.6
> > >   strcpy
> > >   printf
> > >   stdout
> > >   puts
> > >   fflush
> > >   strcat
> > >   ....
> > > --------------------------- clip ---------------------------------
> > >
> > > and with 'objdump -p' :
> > >
> > > --------------------------- clip ---------------------------------
> > > Dynamic Section:
> > >   NEEDED      libc.so.6
> > >   RPATH       /usr/local/lib  <-----------
> > >   INIT        0x10000de4
> > >   FINI        0x10000e08
> > >   HASH        0x10000150
> > >   STRTAB      0x10000254
> > >   SYMTAB      0x10000194
> > > --------------------------- clip ---------------------------------
> > >
> > > instead of the normal '/lib/ld.so.1' and RPATH undefined (so using
> > > the defaults)...
> > >
> > >  So one can produce executables which search these things somewhere else
> > > than in the default places.
> > >
> > >  Perhaps the '/usr/local' is not a suitable place for the 'another glibc',
> > > if still wanting to produce stuff using the original glibc, because the
> > > native compiler tries to find stuff also there, even first. I prefer to
> > > just build a cross-compiler (like '--host=i586-linux --target=i486-linux')
> > > to have the 'another' glibc...
> > >
> > >  I have quite a similar situation now: I have a 'generic' i486-linux-gnu
> > > targeted GCC with glibc-2.1.3 and glibc-2.2.4 built for it, but my native
> > > GCC and Linux (RedHat 7.1) use glibc-2.2.2. So the possibility to produce
> > > older, RH 6.2 compatible and newer 2.2.4-dependent executables exists...
> > > (Ok, there was the RedHat's own 'compatability' stuff without static libs
> > > but I had this own stuff before updating to RH 7.1...)
> > >
> > >  But my thought is that the run-time host will either be a RH 6.2-like or
> > > Suse 7.3 / RedHat 7.2 etc. like which uses glibc-2.2.4 as default, not
> > > that I would try to run the glibc-2.2.4-based executables under RH 7.1...
> > > As the matter of fact, I produce almost everything by linking against
> > > glibc-2.1.3, so if I need to copy stuff into the older Linux'es, it should
> > > run there...
> >
> > Ok, this sounds like it *might* work, except it's my linker that's having trouble running!  So, does
> > this mean that for some reason I'm going to have to try and hack the Makefiles for creating a cross
> > compiler normally?  I mean, the makefiles don't do the -dynamic-linker and -rpath stuff.  Plus, the
> > makes nest around the configure script.  I'm not sure if what needs to get passed will get passed.
> >
> > I don't really care whether my binutils work with 2.2.2 or 2.2.4 or whatever, as long as I can tell
> > them where to find their libraries.
> >
> > Basically, I can't totally figure out why when I do this:
> >
> > cd build-binutils
> > ../binutils-2.11.2/configure --target=powerpc-eabi --prefix=/cross/powerpc-eabi
> > make all install
> >
> > And then it makes the binutils successfully, but it wants different libraries.  Why is this?  If
> > I have the shared libraries on my system, currently running Redhat 7.1 with 2.2.2 as you do, Kai.
> > The only possible weirdness I can think is that I upgraded my kernel to 2.4.12.  Could this have set
> > things up weirdly?
> >
> > %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
> > Joe Sislow
> > Cosmodog, Ltd.
> > joe@cosmodog.com
> >
> > ------
> > Want more information?  See the CrossGCC FAQ, http://www.objsw.com/CrossGCC/
> > Want to unsubscribe? Send a note to crossgcc-unsubscribe@sourceware.cygnus.com

--
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
Joe Sislow
Cosmodog, Ltd.
joe@cosmodog.com




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



More information about the crossgcc mailing list