https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33349
--- Comment #4 from H.J. Lu <hjl.tools at gmail dot com> --- (In reply to Rainer Orth from comment #2) > > --- Comment #1 from H.J. Lu <hjl.tools at gmail dot com> --- > > Created attachment 16307 [details] > > --> https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=16307&action=edit > > A patch > > > > Please try this. > > I've given it a try on amd64-pc-solaris2.11, i386-pc-solaris2.11, and > amd64-pc-freebsd14.0: there are quite a number of failures everywhere: > > * Solaris/amd64: > > +FAIL: Build libplt-1a.so > +FAIL: Build libplt-1b.so > > +FAIL: Build libplt-1a.so > +FAIL: Build libplt-1a-x32.so > +FAIL: Build libplt-1b.so > +FAIL: Build libplt-1b-x32.so > +FAIL: Build libplt-2a.so > +FAIL: Build libplt-2a-x32.so > +FAIL: Build libplt-2b.so > +FAIL: Build libplt-2b-x32.so > > * Solaris/i386: > > +FAIL: Build libplt-1a.so > +FAIL: Build libplt-1b.so > > * FreeBSD/amd64: > > FAIL: Build libplt-1a-x32.so > FAIL: Build libplt-1b-x32.so > FAIL: Build libplt-2a-x32.so > FAIL: Build libplt-2b-x32.so > > Without having even started to analyze them, this looks to me that those > tests have all/most of the issues with your GOT patch reported in PR > ld/33350, which has a partial patch for those. I suspect much of this > is applicable here, too. > > At least the x32 failures certainly are: the x32 exists nowhere but on > Linux. Too many variations. I will limit these tests to Linux. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.
