On Wednesday 02 April 2008 16:30, EXTERNAL Tetz Torsten (Praktikant; ST-FIR/ENG1) wrote: > Denys Vlasenko wrote: > > On Wednesday 02 April 2008 14:31, EXTERNAL Tetz Torsten (Praktikant; > > ST-FIR/ENG1) wrote: > >> Hello, > >> > >> it is this change that makes a segfaulting version out of 1.2.1. > >> > >> --- busybox-1.2.1/Rules.mak Sat Jul 29 00:55:51 2006 > >> +++ busybox-1.2.2/Rules.mak Tue Oct 24 22:22:03 2006 (...) > >> @@ -265,7 +265,7 @@ > >> (...) > >> - CHECKED_LDFLAGS += $(call check_ld,--gc-sections,) > >> + CHECKED_LDFLAGS += $(call check_ld,$(LD),--gc-sections,) (...) > >> > >> > >> I made a test by removing "$(LD)," from the 1.2.2. version > >> and it worked (produced no segfault). > > > > Ok. Now we need to figure out how to fix that in 1.10.0. > > 1.10.0 build system is very different, so you > > will have to find how the change above affect link command line > > (how "good" and "bad" ones differ). > > > > Please make two 1.2.2 trees which have only the aboce difference > > and build both with "make V=1". The output will end with something > > like: > > > that last gcc command calls the linker, > > and I bet it will be slightly different. > > What exactly will be the difference? > > Hello, > > I attached the output of the last gcc command of builds with and > without the change. > > I kompared them and only found one difference in the commands. > The option "-Wl,--gc-sections " is only used in the segfaulting build.
Yes, and it also complains a lot: `optind@@GLIBC_2.2' referenced in section `.text.ls_main' of /home/...../coreutils.a(ls.o): defined in discarded section `.dynbss' of ..../crt1.o That's not good. Which version of ld is that? Run "ld -v"... ohh, I mean, /opt/crosstool/gcc-4.1.2-glibc-2.3.6/sh3-unknown-linux-gnu/lib/gcc/sh3-unknown-linux-gnu/4.1.2/../../../../sh3-unknown-linux-gnu/bin/ld -v -- vda _______________________________________________ busybox mailing list [email protected] http://busybox.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/busybox
