On Mon, Jun 8, 2009 at 7:53 PM, robert baker<robertmba...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Mon, Jun 8, 2009 at 6:26 PM, Robert > Connolly<rob...@linuxfromscratch.org> wrote: >> Use the specs from gcc pass 1. You shouldn't need to edit the linker or start >> files assuming your host system is Glibc. Remove the -fPIC, and >> add "-fno-PIE -fno-stack-protector" to cc1: and cc1plus:, unconditionally. >> These two options are hard coded in GCC. All other options are done in the >> specs file, but gcc pass 1's spec file is vanilla except for -fPIC. Copy this >> spec file to /tools/lib/gcc/i686-pc-linux-gnu/4.4.1/specs just for the >> Binutils tests. I did this a while ago and all tests passed. > > D'oh. I thought I had tried that, but my mistake was that I doubled > back for testsuite checks after installing gcc. Long story short I > amended the specs file, but put it in the wrong location. Thanks for > sending me in the right direction! > > The PT_PAX patch is an exception. Upstream/Pax doesn't maintain the >> test suite, I do, so some test may fail because of the extra program header. >> These are easy to fix. I forget if I checked whether the current Pax patch >> passes test suites, it just needs to be tested on a vanilla system to check. > > One Pax related failure as mentioned. The test just doesn't expect the > pax header to be in the output.
> The only other failure that remains after getting an amended specs > file in place is the FAIL: ld-i386/hidden2 mentioned earlier. > Ok somehow I missed the patch that Robert Connolly made for binutils-2.19.1 and I was using the patch for binutils-2.9 that is in the onward patches.txt. All tests pass in binutils, glibc, and gcc using an amended specs file, and the binutils-2.19.1 patch. We need to bump the version of the pt-pax-flags patch in onward to avoid these failures. Robert Baker -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/hlfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
