This is the mail archive of the gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GCC project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: [ping] Re: [patch] PR40134, use a linker script on arm-linux to link with -lgcc_s -lgcc


On Thu, 2009-09-24 at 11:40 +0100, Andrew Haley wrote:
> Matthias Klose wrote:
> > On 24.09.2009 10:42, Andrew Haley wrote:
> >> Matthias Klose wrote:
> >>> On 22.09.2009 17:56, Andrew Haley wrote:
> >>>> Matthias Klose wrote:
> >>>>> On 11.09.2009 19:12, Matthias Klose wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>>> Applied and checked the attach patch on top of your patch, ran the
> >>>>>> testsuite without regressions (applied the patch for pr40133 from
> >>>>>> Paolo
> >>>>>> for the same test run as well).
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Matthias
> >>>>>
> >>>>> updated the patch to only for arm*-*-linux-*eabi; test results at
> >>>>> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2009-09/msg02000.html
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Ok for the trunk?
> >>>>
> >>>> I'm not at all happy that backtraces are failing now on Java, but I
> >>>> guess your
> >>>> patch didn't cause that.  OK by me.
> >>>
> >>> Without this patch, the build of libjava fails on arm*-*-linux-*eabi:
> >>>
> >>> /usr/bin/ld: .libs/jv-convert: hidden symbol `__sync_synchronize' in
> >>> /root/gcc/newgccsnapshot/gcc-snapshot-20090919/build/./gcc/libgcc.a(linux-atomic.o)
> >>>
> >>> is referenced by DSO
> >>> /usr/bin/ld: final link failed: Nonrepresentable section on output
> >>> collect2: ld returned 1 exit status
> >>> make[5]: *** [jv-convert] Error 1
> >>>
> >>> Full buildlog at http://people.debian.org/~doko/tmp/snapshot.log.bz2
> >>>
> >>> The reason for this is not linking the shared libgcj with -lgcc.
> >>
> >> I find this extremely surprising.  LDFLAGS are explicitly set to do
> >> that when building libgcc.  I did this myself, and I'm pretty sure that
> >> it works.
> >>
> >> svn diff -r150701:150702
> > 
> > The setting of LDFLAGS to "-Wl,-lgcc" (working around libtool
> > assumptions) in the Makefile gets overwritten to the empty value when
> > called by the toplevel make, so this has no effect.  The intent to do
> > this with a linker script was to have it done for every usage.
> 
> I agree that a linker script is a better idea, I just wanted to know why
> my fix wasn't working.  Thanks for that.
> 
> >>> Am I allowed to check in this patch to fix the build failure, or do I
> >>> have to wait for an approval of an ARM maintainer?
> >>
> >> I think you need an ARM maintainer, but I first want to know why your
> >> build isn't linking with libgcc.
> > 
> > Ok, Richard is seems to be in vacation until early October.

This isn't really my area; so I'm happy to trust Andrew's judgement in
this case.

R.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]