On Monday 21 February 2011 13:42:30 Mr. T wrote: > Hi, > > I had a go at building this today and came across a build failure. > > Everything upto and including Chapter 6.11 built exactly as expected. > Chapter 6.12 (Binutils) is where I hit the snag. > > The actual build of Binutils is fine. Running the testsuite had the > following result : > > binutils test - OK > gas tests - OK > > ld tests - Failed > > For test elfvsb.exp : > > FAIL: visibility (hidden) (non PIC) > FAIL: visibility (hidden) (non PIC, load offset) > FAIL: visibility (hidden) (PIC main, non PIC so) > FAIL: visibility (hidden_normal) (non PIC) > FAIL: visibility (hidden_normal) (non PIC, load offset) > FAIL: visibility (hidden_normal) (PIC main, non PIC so) > FAIL: visibility (hidden_undef_def) (non PIC) > FAIL: visibility (hidden_undef_def) (non PIC, load offset) > FAIL: visibility (hidden_undef_def) (PIC main, non PIC so) > FAIL: visibility (hidden_weak) (non PIC) > FAIL: visibility (hidden_weak) (non PIC, load offset) > FAIL: visibility (hidden_weak) (PIC main, non PIC so) > FAIL: visibility (protected) (non PIC) > FAIL: visibility (protected) (non PIC, load offset) > FAIL: visibility (protected) (PIC main, non PIC so) > FAIL: visibility (protected_undef_def) (non PIC) > FAIL: visibility (protected_undef_def) (non PIC, load offset) > FAIL: visibility (protected_undef_def) (PIC main, non PIC so) > FAIL: visibility (protected_weak) (non PIC) > FAIL: visibility (protected_weak) (non PIC, load offset) > FAIL: visibility (protected_weak) (PIC main, non PIC so) > FAIL: visibility (normal) (non PIC) > FAIL: visibility (normal) (non PIC, load offset) > FAIL: visibility (normal) (PIC main, non PIC so) > > For test elfweak.exp : > > FAIL: ELF DSO weak data first DSO > FAIL: ELF DSO weak data last DSO > FAIL: ELF DSO weak data first DSO common > FAIL: ELF DSO weak data last DSO common > > For test shared.exp : > > FAIL: shared (non PIC) > FAIL: shared (non PIC, load offset) > FAIL: shared (PIC main, non PIC so) > > Finally on test srec.exp : > > FAIL: S-records with constructors > > It then fails at the end of the ld test section. > > I've backtracked and checked all the edits I made, they look fine. The > configparms file at 6.9 (Glibc) was copied and pasted due to its size > and complexity, so Im confident with that. > > Any thoughts on what may be causing this, or if I have missed a typo > somewhere ? > > Thanks, > > Steve.
The 'make CC="gcc -O2 -fno-stack-protector -nopie -fno-PIE" check' should cover this. Please send me ld/ld.log. Also, is this a i686 or an x86_64? robert
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
-- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/hlfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
