On Fri, Feb 05, 2021 at 10:39:08AM -0600, Bruce Dubbs via lfs-dev wrote: > On 2/5/21 6:48 AM, Ken Moffat via lfs-dev wrote: > > While replying to Frans on -support re his inability to build > > glibc-2.33, I glanced at the binutils bugs > > https://www.mail-archive.com/bug-binutils@gnu.org/ and said that > > 2.36 might be buggy. At that time I hadn't read all the links > > gurgle found for me. One of them is > > https://www.linuxquestions.org/questions/linux-from-scratch-13/binutils-2-36-strip-4175689760/ > > which looks *really* annoying. > > I took a look at the above link, but I cannot reproduce the problem with LFS > instructions. In my test build in /mnt/lfs/lib I have: > > > [ /mnt/lfs/lib ]$ ll libc* > lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 14 Feb 2 16:20 libcap.so.2 -> libcap.so.2.47 > -rwxr-xr-x 1 root root 39440 Feb 2 17:44 libcap.so.2.47 > lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 17 Feb 2 17:44 libcom_err.so.2 -> > libcom_err.so.2.1 > -rwxr-xr-x 1 root root 18776 Feb 2 17:44 libcom_err.so.2.1 > -rwxr-xr-x 1 root root 43288 Feb 2 17:44 libcrypt-2.33.so > lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 16 Feb 2 16:10 libcrypt.so.1 -> > libcrypt-2.33.so > -rwxr-xr-x 1 root root 1835448 Feb 2 17:44 libc-2.33.so > -rwxrwxr-x 1 root root 11946280 Feb 2 17:44 libc-2.33.so.dbg > lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 12 Feb 2 16:10 libc.so.6 -> libc-2.33.so > > [ /mnt/lfs/lib ]$ file libc-2.33.so > libc-2.33.so: ELF 64-bit LSB shared object, x86-64, version 1 (GNU/Linux), > dynamically linked, interpreter /lib/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2, for GNU/Linux > 3.2.0, stripped > > [ /mnt/lfs/lib ]$ file libcap.so.2.47 > libcap.so.2.47: ELF 64-bit LSB shared object, x86-64, version 1 (SYSV), > dynamically linked, stripped > > So the book does what we want. On the other hand, we do not do an > unconditional strip on anything. We start with find /lib /usr/lib -type f > -name \*.so* ... so that would skip symlinks. > > We use the same structure in BLFS Section "Notes on Building Software". > > On the other hand, doing an explicit strip on a symlink does replace the > symlink with the stripped version of the link's resolved file. > > I can confirm that running strip against a symlink on a system with > binutils-2,25 does not affect the symlink. > > -- Bruce > Hi Bruce,
thanks for looking at this. At the moment I don't have 2.36, I'm just warning that some people are reporting enough changed/unexpected behaviour that this might cause problems. good to know that we are not directly affected by the stripping change. ĸen -- Any attempt to brew coffee with a teapot should result in the error code "418 I'm a teapot". The resulting entity body MAY be short and stout. -- rfc 2324 (1st April 1998) -- http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/lfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
