Doubts using the precompiled binaries

[marco restelli]

2017-04-26 1:13 GMT+02:00, Manfred Schwarb <manfred99@gmx.ch>:
> Am 26.04.2017 um 00:21 schrieb Manfred Schwarb:
>> Am 25.04.2017 um 20:30 schrieb marco restelli:
>>> Hi all,
>>>    I am experimenting with the precompiled binaries from the GCC Wiki,
>>> and in particular with gcc-6.3.0.
>>>
>>> I have two questions.
>>>
>>>
>>> 1) I get an error trying to link without -fno-use-linker-plugin
>>>
>>> gfortran *.o -o test
>>> collect2: fatal error: cannot find 'ld'
>>> compilation terminated.
>>>
>>> >From the documentation, I see that this should not be a problem with
>>> ld >= 2.21, and I have 2.26.1. Also, using gfortran compiled by myself
>>> I don't need this option. Is this expected?
>>>
>>
>> ld >= 2.21 definitely has plugin support.
>> You probably need the package binutils-gold for this to work.

I do have both

# ld --version
GNU ld (Gentoo 2.26.1 p1.0) 2.26.1

# ld.gold --version
GNU gold (Gentoo 2.26.1 p1.0 2.26.1) 1.11

Both are from binutils-2.26.1. What else should I have?

>>> 2) Trying to do static linking with "-static" I get the error
>>>
>>> <local-installation-path>/bin/../lib/gcc/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/6.3.0/../../../../lib64/libgfortran.a(unix.o):
>>> In function `tempfile':
>>> /tmp/gcc-6.3.0-build/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/libgfortran/../../../gcc-6.3.0-source/gcc-6.3.0/libgfortran/io/unix.c:1208:
>>> undefined reference to `__secure_getenv'
>>> collect2: error: ld returned 1 exit status
>>>
>>
>> Hmm, I do see it, too. No idea. I will investigate, seems to be quite a
>> mess.
>> If someone has a clue, I would appreciate it.
>>
>> The build system has binutils-2.25, as I got troubles building gfortran
>> with older binutils. I don't know if this has something to do with it.
>>
>
> Seems to have nothing to do with binutils.
> glibc <2.17 has __secure_getenv.
> glibc >=2.17 has __secure_getenv and secure_getenv, but you can not link
> against __secure_getenv.
> So if you compile libgfortran on a system with old glibc, you
> can't use it for static compilation on a system with new glibc.

Yes, indeed, I have glibc-2.23 and I see

# nm /usr/lib64/libc.a | grep secure_getenv
0000000000000000 T __libc_secure_getenv
0000000000000000 W secure_getenv
                 U __libc_secure_getenv
                 U __libc_secure_getenv
                 U __libc_secure_getenv
                 U __libc_secure_getenv
                 U __libc_secure_getenv

# nm /usr/lib64/libc.so | grep secure_getenv
0000000000035960 t __GI___libc_secure_getenv
0000000000035960 W __libc_secure_getenv
0000000000035960 W __secure_getenv@GLIBC_2.2.5
0000000000035960 W secure_getenv


Thanks a lot,
   Marco