[ping2] Re: [ping] Re: [patch] PR40134, use a linker script on arm-linux to link with -lgcc_s -lgcc

Matthias Klose doko@ubuntu.com
Fri Oct 30 00:15:00 GMT 2009

ping on reapplying r147076 again to fix PR40133

thanks, Matthias

On 21.10.2009 15:23, Matthias Klose wrote:
> On 14.10.2009 15:38, Richard Earnshaw wrote:
>> 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; but I'm happy to trust Andrew's judgement in
>> this case.
> I committed this to the trunk yesterday after confirmation from Andrew.
> Paolo, is it ok to apply r147076 again to fix PR40133 ?
> Matthias

More information about the Java-patches mailing list