This is the mail archive of the java-discuss@sources.redhat.com mailing list for the Java project.

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

Re: Java broken after i386 PIC change

To: Richard Henderson <rth at redhat dot com>
Subject: Re: Java broken after i386 PIC change
From: Jeff Sturm <jeff dot sturm at commerceone dot com>
Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2001 14:21:10 -0500
CC: Bryce McKinlay <bryce at albatross dot co dot nz>, apbianco at cygnus dot com, gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org, martin dot kahlert at infineon dot com, java-discuss at sourceware dot cygnus dot com
Organization: Commerce One
References: <20010120233505.A5266@redhat.com> <Pine.LNX.4.21.0101212323130.912-100000@cc42593-a.taylor1.mi.home.com> <20010122110522.A7543@redhat.com>

Richard Henderson wrote:
> A change to i386.c?  Duh, no.

Er... I mean was there a similar change to alpha.  Evidently not.  So binutils
2.10 had different and unrelated bugs concerning x86 and alpha, and I stumbled
across both by coincidence.

> > Shared objects built with current gcc and binutils 2.10 definitely do not
> > work on alphaev56-unknown-linux-gnu.
> 
> Yes.  There was a bug related to generating dynamic
> relocations to dwarf2 debug information.  You want to
> use current cvs anyway, since it makes the line number
> information much smaller.

Good to know, thanks.  I did search the binutils list for something relevant,
but did not look hard enough.  (Hopefully there'll be a binutils release to
correspond to the gcc release, otherwise 3.0 will be ignored by most Alpha
users.)

--
Jeff Sturm
jeff.sturm@commerceone.com

References:
- Re: Java broken after i386 PIC change
  - From: Richard Henderson
- Re: Java broken after i386 PIC change
  - From: Jeff Sturm
- Re: Java broken after i386 PIC change
  - From: Richard Henderson

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