This is the mail archive of the
java@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the Java project.
Re: seg fault on startup
Ben Tatham writes:
> (gdb) info share
> >From To Syms Read Shared Object Library
> No /usr/lib/libgcc_s.so.1
> 0x0f1e5000 0x0f9158a8 Yes /usr/lib/libgcj.so.7
> 0x0e7324f0 0x0e749f8c Yes /lib/libm.so.6
> 0x0e6c22b0 0x0e6ccc4c Yes /lib/libpthread.so.0
> 0x0e69bea0 0x0e69cd80 Yes /lib/libdl.so.2
> 0x0e551a40 0x0e6543e8 Yes /lib/libc.so.6
> No /lib/ld.so.1
>
>
> And the links on my target platform...confirming I am running the
> correct shared libs.
You need to go into the debugger to find out what is at
> > #5696 0x7ffff998 in ?? ()
and how you got there. It doesn't seem like shared libraries.
> However, I was making a mistake earlier...I had foo.debug and
> Foo.debug, but my silly windows intermediary screwed up the ftps to
> my target, so I wasn't actually running the debug version of the
> statically linked version. Anyway, the point is that the
> statically linked version of Foo works in both the stripped and
> non-stripped cases -- which would seem to indicate that perhaps it
> is not the correct version of libgcj...but as far as I can tell, I
> do have the correct versions.
OK.
> Other versions of interest, libc.so: 2.3.1. Our GCJ is technically
> compiled for libc 2.3.3, but we have been running gcc-4.0.1-libc-2.3.3
> for some time without a problem. We cannot seem to compile gcc/gcj
> 4.1.2-libc-2.3.1 though.
> And besides, the statically linked version still depends on libc,
> ld, lm, etc. and works fine, so I don't think that is the problem.
That's binutils, not libc.
Andrew.