This is the mail archive of the crossgcc@sourceware.org mailing list for the crossgcc project.
See crosstool-NG 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] |
Brock, On Thu, Jul 10, 2014 at 6:14 PM, brock.zheng <goodmenlinux@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi, Yan > > The new patch is attathed. I remove the "-static" option, > because I have tested, and the result shows that the "-all-staic" is enough > to create the static toolchain. > > If "-static" is places ahead of "-all-static", the later one will no take > the effect, and the static toolchain build will fail at binutils stage. > > Would you please have a review? > > > On 2014-07-08 22:09:54, Yann E. MORIN wrote: >> Date: Tue, 8 Jul 2014 22:09:54 +0200 >> From: "Yann E. MORIN" <yann.morin.1998@free.fr> >> To: "brock.zheng" <goodmenzy@gmail.com> >> Cc: crosstool-NG ML <crossgcc@sourceware.org> >> Subject: Re: [PATCH] Fixup the static toolchain build problem >> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.22 (2013-10-16) >> >> Brock, All, >> >> On 2014-07-08 20:29 +0800, brock.zheng spake thusly: >> > When build binutils, libtool tried to translate -lfl to /usr/lib/libfl.so >> > But when change to "LDFLAGS=-all-static -static", libtool works fine. >> > -lfl will be translated to /usr/lib/libfl.a >> >> Here are a few comments on your patch. >> >> First you forgot to add your Signed-oof-by to the patch, so we can't use >> it. See: >> http://crosstool-ng.org/git/crosstool-ng/tree/docs/7%20-%20Contributing%20to%20crosstool-NG.txt >> >> Second, in a previous mail, you said: >> >> I have checked the libtool script, and found that the following option >> -all-static >> -static >> -static-libtool-libs >> is processed in a strange way. If any one of those three option appears >> firstly in the cmdline, all others >> will be neglected. Our LDFLAGS is ".... -static -all-static -o", so the >> -static option takes the real effect, >> and the -all-static has no useage actually! that is the cause of the >> failure. >> >> So, if only the first option is in effect, why do we still cary the >> -static ? >> >> Otherwise, I'm not opposed to the idea. ;-) >> >> Regards, >> Yann E. MORIN. >> >> > --- >> > scripts/build/binutils/binutils.sh | 2 +- >> > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) >> > >> > diff --git a/scripts/build/binutils/binutils.sh b/scripts/build/binutils/binutils.sh >> > index b6207be..cc57b5a 100644 >> > --- a/scripts/build/binutils/binutils.sh >> > +++ b/scripts/build/binutils/binutils.sh >> > @@ -220,7 +220,7 @@ do_binutils_backend() { >> > "${CT_BINUTILS_EXTRA_CONFIG_ARRAY[@]}" >> > >> > if [ "${static_build}" = "y" ]; then >> > - extra_make_flags+=("LDFLAGS=-static -all-static") >> > + extra_make_flags+=("LDFLAGS=-all-static -static") >> > CT_DoLog EXTRA "Prepare binutils for static build" >> > CT_DoExecLog ALL make ${JOBSFLAGS} configure-host >> > fi >> > -- >> > 2.0.1 >> > >> >> -- >> .-----------------.--------------------.------------------.--------------------. >> | Yann E. MORIN | Real-Time Embedded | /"\ ASCII RIBBON | Erics' conspiracy: | >> | +33 662 376 056 | Software Designer | \ / CAMPAIGN | ___ | >> | +33 223 225 172 `------------.-------: X AGAINST | \e/ There is no | >> | http://ymorin.is-a-geek.org/ | _/*\_ | / \ HTML MAIL | v conspiracy. | >> '------------------------------^-------^------------------^--------------------' >> >> -- >> For unsubscribe information see http://sourceware.org/lists.html#faq >> > > -- > Brock Zheng <yzheng@techyauld.com> > 郑 ? > > 北京中科腾越科技发展有限公司 > 北京市海淀区东北旺西路8号中关村软件园21号楼启明星辰大厦二层六区(邮编:100094) > > > -- > For unsubscribe information see http://sourceware.org/lists.html#faq Accepted! Thanks, -Bryan -- 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] |