Re: [Pkg-pascal-devel] armhf ABI flag problems with fpc-built binaries
On Thu, Jun 09, 2016 at 08:28:12PM +0200, Paul Gevers wrote:
>Hi Steve,
>
>Would this be similar or related to bug 695547¹? I expect it is best to
>follow up there if so (including appending the report below, so we
>connect the pieces properly).
ACK, that's exactly the same issue; thanks for pointing this out. :-)
I'm guessing nobody has found the time to fix this yet after ~3.5
years. :-(
>On 09-06-16 19:55, Steve McIntyre wrote:
>> Hi folks,
>>
>> I'm one of the ARM porters, and I've recently run a scan of binaries
>> in the archive to check on the state of the binaries for armel and
>> armhf. As part of the ARM ABI, binaries (libraries and programs) are
>> expected to specify ELF flags to specify whether they're using the
>> hard-float or soft-float ABI (if they care specifically - some
>> don't). I've found a few fpc-using packages (both under your
>> maintenance and not) that appear to get this wrong, which suggests
>> that there might be a toolchain issue here in fpc and friends. My
>> scanner is telling me that the following armhf packages are broken:
>>
>> doublecmd-plugins_0.7.1-2_armhf.deb hf_flags_wrong:6
>> fp-compiler-3.0.0_3.0.0+dfsg-4_armhf.deb hf_flags_wrong:4
>> fp-ide-3.0.0_3.0.0+dfsg-4_armhf.deb hf_flags_wrong:1
>> fp-utils-3.0.0_3.0.0+dfsg-4_armhf.deb hf_flags_wrong:28 no_hf_flags:2
>> gearhead_1.300-1_armhf.deb hf_flags_wrong:1
>> pasdoc_0.14.0-1_armhf.deb hf_flags_wrong:1
>>
>> "hf_flags_wrong" here means that the package is targeting armhf, but
>> binaries within it claim to use the soft-float ABI. "no_hf_flags" is
>> the number of binaries that have no ABI float flags attached. To see
>> for yourself, you can use "readelf --file-header" to inspect the flags
>> on binaries - look for
>>
>> Flags: 0x5000202, has entry point, Version5 EABI, soft-float ABI
>>
>> etc. armhf binaries should show
>>
>> Flags: 0x5000402, has entry point, Version5 EABI, hard-float ABI
>>
>> instead. I'm not sure exactly where fpc would be setting flags like
>> this (if anywhere) or if it's calling binutils incorrectly maybe. Can
>> anybody help me dig into this please?
>>
>> (See the attached list for details of the broken files.)
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Pkg-pascal-devel mailing list
>> Pkg-pascal-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org
>> http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-pascal-devel
>>
>
--
Steve McIntyre, Cambridge, UK. steve@einval.com
"Because heaters aren't purple!" -- Catherine Pitt
Reply to: