[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: [Glibc-bsd-commits] r1827 - trunk/web/patches



Hi Petr,


Petr Salinger a écrit :
> Author: ps-guest
> Date: 2006-12-27 14:10:36 +0100 (Wed, 27 Dec 2006)
> New Revision: 1827
> 
> Modified:
>    trunk/web/patches/binutils_2.17.diff
> Log:
> * update binutils status for kfreebsd-amd64
> 
> 
> 
> Modified: trunk/web/patches/binutils_2.17.diff
> ===================================================================
> --- trunk/web/patches/binutils_2.17.diff	2006-12-22 20:20:01 UTC (rev 1826)
> +++ trunk/web/patches/binutils_2.17.diff	2006-12-27 13:10:36 UTC (rev 1827)
> @@ -15,7 +15,24 @@
>       i_ehdrp->e_type = ET_DYN;
>     else if ((abfd->flags & EXEC_P) != 0)
>  
> +UPDATE: Merged upstream part is already in experimental binutils 2.17.20061210cvs-1.
> +        It looks like above mentioned problems with fakeroot are due to binaries
> +        have not been linked against libc/pthread dynamically.
> +        glibc should be rebuilded using new binutils or just manually fix OUTPUT_FORMAT
> +        in /usr/lib/libc.so and /usr/lib/libpthread.so by 
>  

Thanks for your work. This seems to fix the fakeroot problem, however I
have found some more problems.

First the change from elf64-x86-64 to elf64-x86-64-freebsd breaks the
build of the kernel ("ld: target elf64-x86-64 not found"). This can
probably be fixed, but I wonder to know if this change is really
necessary? Plain FreeBSD amd64 seems to use elf64-x86-64.

Second this seems to cause some problems when trying to build a bi-arch
gcc. I get: File format is ambiguous. Matching formats:
elf32-i386-freebsd elf32-i386.

Changing the patch so that only elf64-x86-64 and elf32-i386-freebsd
format are supported seems to fix those problems. What do you think?

Bye,
Aurelien

-- 
  .''`.  Aurelien Jarno	            | GPG: 1024D/F1BCDB73
 : :' :  Debian developer           | Electrical Engineer
 `. `'   aurel32@debian.org         | aurelien@aurel32.net
   `-    people.debian.org/~aurel32 | www.aurel32.net



Reply to: