Hi,
Sorry to bring this one up again, but binutils seems to fail under
busybox and a uClibc snapshot:
tc-arm.o: In function `s_ltorg':
tc-arm.c:(.text+0x12b30): undefined reference to `_obstack_newchunk'
cond.o: In function `s_ifdef':
cond.c:(.text+0x1d4): undefined reference to `_obstack_newchunk'
.. (more follow) ...
What was the actual fix? The one proposed by Anthony doesn't seem to
have made it into uClibc.
Thanks,
-Chris
On 6/29/13, 5:19 AM, Anthony G. Basile wrote:
On 06/28/2013 09:27 AM, Bernhard Reutner-Fischer wrote:
On 24 June 2013 17:51, Bernhard Reutner-Fischer
<rep.dot....@gmail.com> wrote:
On 24 June 2013 15:25:20 "Anthony G. Basile"
<bas...@opensource.dyc.edu>
wrote:
On 06/23/2013 05:25 PM, Anthony G. Basile wrote:
On 06/23/2013 02:16 PM, Bernhard Reutner-Fischer wrote:
On 23 June 2013 18:14:08 "Anthony G. Basile"
<bas...@opensource.dyc.edu>
wrote:
From: "Anthony G. Basile" <bluen...@gentoo.org>
Programs using obstacks, like the suite of utilities provided by
coreutils, need _obstack_newchunk so we unhide the symbol.
Eh, that sounds pretty broken. Are you sure this is the right
thing to
do? They should most likely obstack_*grow() instead.
Actually its pretty clear what's going on here. Many obstack
functions
are implemented as macros around _obstack_newchunk, so "functions"
like
obstack_*grow() are decls which expand to calls to
_obstack_newchunk. Read
<obstack.h> around line 292. Here's a simple poc:
Right, completely forgot this.
Thanks for the fix!
There was a hidden_def but it was disabled (sloppy grep on my part),
pushed a fix for this now, thanks!
Thanks. I tested and it works.
_______________________________________________
uClibc mailing list
uClibc@uclibc.org
http://lists.busybox.net/mailman/listinfo/uclibc
