This is the mail archive of the crossgcc@sources.redhat.com 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] |
I've been having trouble compiling glibc 2.3.2 for powerpc 405 processor using Dan Kegels scripts as a template (with minor variations). After reviewing a lot of messages from this list I came to the conclusion hat it should just work if I use the switches, envirnoment variables, and compile options used in the script. However, I consistenly kept getting errors due to unresolved references while making libm. The references are all found in a handfull of files from sysdeps/powerpc/nofpu (fegetexcept.c, fesetround.c etc). The references were to three variables, all found in sysdeps/powerpc/nofpu/sim-full.c. The files with the mission references were all listed in the libm-support variable in math/Makefile. I eventually resorted to adding sim-full.c to the libm-support variable in sysdeps/powerpc/nofpu/Makefile (conditional on subdir being math). I'm a bit of a novice, so I'm concerned that I may have fixed it in an inappropriate way and will encounter problems downstream as a result.
You must have blinked :-) My most recent release has a fix for this written by Daniel Jacobowitz: http://www.kegel.com/crosstool/current/glibc-2.3.2-patches/glibc-2.3.2-without-fp.patch It needs to be submitted to the glibc mailing list still, but it seems to work fine for me.
I suspect you want to apply this rather than adding sim-full.c in, but I wouldn't know. (Oh, sure, I have a spiffy build script, but do I *understand* anything? Not really... one of these days, maybe I'll take Karim and Bill's advice and learn this stuff more thoroughly.)
Incidentally, glibc regression test results for this toolchain are at http://www.kegel.com/crosstool/current/summaries/powerpc-405-linux-gnu-gcc-3.3-glibc-2.3.2.glibc.sum The four floating-point failures are an accuracy thing, and probably just mean I haven't read libm/README yet... The only other failure I know of is linuxthreads/unload. Haven't looked at why that's failing yet.
-- Dan Kegel http://www.kegel.com http://counter.li.org/cgi-bin/runscript/display-person.cgi?user=78045
------ Want more information? See the CrossGCC FAQ, http://www.objsw.com/CrossGCC/ Want to unsubscribe? Send a note to crossgcc-unsubscribe@sources.redhat.com
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |