On Sun, Jul 09, 2006 at 07:06:24PM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote: > On Sun, Jul 09, 2006 at 08:29:39PM -0500, Stephen R Marenka wrote: > > On Sun, Jul 09, 2006 at 01:25:48PM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote: > > > I'd guess the root bug here is that /usr/lib/libc_nonshared.a is being > > > used > > > instead of /lib/libc.so.6? > > > Is this due to a change in gcc or gmp? Since it's an m68k-only problem > > I'd guess it was gcc. > > Maybe neither? Could be a buggy glibc.
Could be, although the same glibc was around for the previous (-1) gmp
build, and that compiled fine -- different versions of gcc and binutils
though.
> > Any idea how to figure out how to get around this? I need a working gmp
> > to build the latest gcc, which I'd then try to build gmp with. :\
>
> First check whether /usr/lib/libc.so is a correct linker script, if so try
> to run the failing link command by hand, and maybe try removing the version
> script from the linker commandline to see if that makes a difference?
The command line minus object files looks like.
| -Wl,-z -Wl,defs -Wl,-soname -Wl,libmp.so.3 -Wl,-version-script
| -Wl,.libs/libmp.ver -o .libs/libmp.so.3.1.10
.libs/libmp.ver looks like
| { global:
| itom;
| xtom;
| move;
| madd;
| msub;
| mult;
| mdiv;
| sdiv;
| msqrt;
| pow;
| rpow;
| gcd;
| mcmp;
| min;
| mout;
| mtox;
| mfree;
| __gmp_set_memory_functions;
| local: *; };
Dropping any single parameter just seems to get me various errors.
Adding any of /usr/lib/libc_nonshared.a, /usr/lib/libc.a, or
/usr/lib/libc.so to the end of the command line results in a completed
compile. I'm not exactly sure what the implications of that are.
--
Stephen R. Marenka If life's not fun, you're not doing it right!
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
