Home Original page

Is the current ld brolen? (Re: ld is broken on Linux/alpha)

H . J . Lu hjl@lucon.org
Tue Nov 13 02:08:00 GMT 2001 
On Sat, Nov 24, 2001 at 11:46:37PM +0100, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 24, 2001 at 01:18:21AM -0800, H . J . Lu wrote:
> > On Sat, Nov 24, 2001 at 10:08:57AM +0100, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> > > On Sat, Nov 24, 2001 at 12:06:35AM -0800, H . J . Lu wrote:
> > > > Now I got those while building glibc 2.2.4 on Linux/x86? Jakub, have
> > > > you tried your patch with RedHat build? Something is going on.
> > > 
> > > I just did did make check and some testing on small testcases I had.
> > > I'll bootstrap gcc and glibc on Monday.
> > > 
> > 
> > Please make sure there are no regressions with "make check" on gcc and
> > glibc. BTW, I don't know if checking on gcc and glibc will be enough
> > to catch all possible problems.
> 
> Strange thing is that on Linux/x86 glibc 2.2.4 bootstrapped just fine with
> ld which has my SHF_MERGE/STT_SECTION patch in.

Does your gcc support SHF_MERGE/STT_SECTION? Did you see the linker
messages during the build?

> I'm still running make check, will see if that makes a difference somewhere.

My glibc build finished with those ld messages and "make check" failed.


H.J.
More information about the Binutils mailing list