On 2 May 2012 05:15, Michael Hope <michael.h...@linaro.org> wrote: > On 27 April 2012 11:59, Michael Hope <michael.h...@linaro.org> wrote: >> On 23 April 2012 14:23, Jon Masters <j...@redhat.com> wrote: >>> On 04/22/2012 06:06 PM, Michael Hope wrote: >>>> On 21 April 2012 09:10, Jon Masters <j...@redhat.com> wrote: >>>>> Hey everyone, >>>>> >>>>> Following up here. Where do we stand? We need to have upstream patches >>>>> before we can pull them into the distro - is that piece done? >>>> >>>> Hi Jon. I've been away, sorry. I've just sent the GCC patch and >>>> Carlos is on the hook for the GLIBC side. >>> >>> I saw the email. Could folks do me a favor and let me know the moment >>> this lands in upstream and I'll arrange for us to pull it immediately. >>> >>> (I'm on all the libc lists, but then I'm on almost every list, >>> everywhere, so it takes a bit of time to get to it) >> >> Hi Jon. There's a fault with the GCC patch so it's still in progress. >> Carlos sent the GLIBC patch out for review today. > > Hi Jon. The GCC patch is now upstream as r186859 and r187012.
I noticed that it now sets the dynamic loader to /lib/ld-linux-armhf.so.3 even when configured for soft-float ABI and linking against a soft-float rootfs. The resulting binaries then fail to run. Passing -mfloat-abi=softfp to the link command fixes it. Is this change in behaviour intentional? -- Mans Rullgard / mru _______________________________________________ linaro-toolchain mailing list linaro-toolchain@lists.linaro.org http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-toolchain
