Re: binutils 2.19 issue with kernel link

2009-07-09 Thread Alan Modra
On Thu, Jul 09, 2009 at 02:31:53PM -0500, Edmar Wienskoski-RA8797 wrote: > I understand your arguments, but there is something inconsistent about this. > If I change the script to be: >_end3 = . ; >. = _end3; >. = ALIGN(PAGE_SIZE); >_end = . ; >PROVIDE32 (end

Re: binutils 2.19 issue with kernel link

2009-07-09 Thread Alan Modra
On Thu, Jul 09, 2009 at 02:31:53PM -0500, Edmar Wienskoski-RA8797 wrote: > Kumar Gala wrote: >> >> On Jul 8, 2009, at 11:40 PM, Alan Modra wrote: >> >>> On Wed, Jul 08, 2009 at 10:52:59PM -0500, Kumar Gala wrote: To further verify this if I switch the -me500 to -mspe and build things seem

Re: binutils 2.19 issue with kernel link

2009-07-09 Thread Edmar Wienskoski-RA8797
Kumar Gala wrote: On Jul 8, 2009, at 11:40 PM, Alan Modra wrote: On Wed, Jul 08, 2009 at 10:52:59PM -0500, Kumar Gala wrote: To further verify this if I switch the -me500 to -mspe and build things seem to be ok. This further points at some APU section related bug. Like omitting .PPC.EMB.ap

[Bug binutils/10376] configure: error: cannot compute sizeof (off_t), 77

2009-07-09 Thread booleandomain at gmail dot com
--- Additional Comments From booleandomain at gmail dot com 2009-07-09 19:55 --- It seems the problem is not related to CFLAGS containing -Wl,--dynamic-linker,/tools/lib64/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2, but to the fact I probably installed glibc in /tools in the wrong way. In fact, I configured i

[Bug binutils/10380] New: cannot build binutils statically

2009-07-09 Thread booleandomain at gmail dot com
I'm trying to build binutils-2.19.1 statically. I tried with ../binutils-2.19.1/configure LDFLAGS="-static" && make but I get: ldd binutils/ar linux-vdso.so.1 => (0x7fffaf9ff000) libz.so.1 => /lib/libz.so.1 (0x7fe1a223d000) libc.so.6 => /lib/libc.so.6 (0x7fe1a1ee2000) /lib64/ld-linux-

Re: binutils 2.19 issue with kernel link

2009-07-09 Thread Kumar Gala
On Jul 8, 2009, at 11:40 PM, Alan Modra wrote: On Wed, Jul 08, 2009 at 10:52:59PM -0500, Kumar Gala wrote: To further verify this if I switch the -me500 to -mspe and build things seem to be ok. This further points at some APU section related bug. Like omitting .PPC.EMB.apuinfo from your k