This is the mail archive of the crossgcc@sourceware.org mailing list for the crossgcc project.

See the CrossGCC FAQ for lots more information.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: Hidden error(?) during build


Hi guys

I'm still working on the solaris port an I have the same issue here.
While trying to build the i686-nptl-linux-gnu toolchain under
OpenSolaris, the problems appears during the make install rule of the
libc function.

The problem is that solaris tries to execute ld-linux.so.2, which is an
elf 32 bits dyn lib, and it fails with a memory fault, not a "cannot
execute binary file". Hence the build stops on this error.

I'm trying to build an eglibc based toolchain yet but it seems that
eglibc is fixed on this make install rule.

Regards,
Thomas

Le lundi 05 janvier 2009 Ã 21:00 +0100, Yann E. MORIN a Ãcrit :
> Michael,
> All,
> 
> On Sunday 04 January 2009 14:06:53 michael wrote:
> > Building powerpc-405-linux-gnu I noticed one error message (I've elided 
> > the path for clarity):
> > [ERROR]    .../powerpc-405-linux-gnu/build/build-libc/elf/ld.so.1: 1:
> > Syntax error: "(" unexpected 
> 
> > This is building on Ubuntu; building on RHEL I get the slightly more 
> > illuminating message (but not flagged as an error):
> > [ALL  ]    /bin/sh: .../powerpc-405-linux-gnu/build/build-libc/elf/ld.so.1: cannot execute binary file
> 
> > Ah: now all is clear.  *Somebody* is trying to execute the target ld.so.1 
> > -- that's not going to work, now is it?
> 
> Surely not! :-)
> 
> > I don't know whether this actually matters, and whether the offending code 
> > is in crosstool-ng itself, or is part of glibc (I guess my money isss with 
> > glibc).
> 
> I'd say it lives somewhere in the glibc Makefiles. Sigh... :-(
> 
> > Still, it's a bit bothersome.  The built toolchain actually seems  
> > to work just fine -- I think the only side effect here is that 
> > sys-root/usr/libexec/getconf is empty -- but something odd to notice!
> 
> I don't have PowerPC to test on. Does the toolchain work? What is .../getconf
> used for? Is it vital?
> 
> My bet is, unless the toolchain does not work, leave it alone, and go your
> way. There are better things to work on than fixing glibc weirdness.
> 
> Regards,
> Yann E. MORIN.
> 
> 


--
For unsubscribe information see http://sourceware.org/lists.html#faq


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