linux-mips
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Bintuils

To: Alan Cox <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>
Subject: Re: Bintuils
From: Ralf Baechle <ralf@uni-koblenz.de>
Date: Fri, 28 Nov 1997 14:54:11 +0100
Cc: ralf@mailhost.uni-koblenz.de, linux@cthulhu.engr.sgi.com
In-reply-to: <m0xbQZf-0005FsC@lightning.swansea.linux.org.uk>; from Alan Cox on Fri, Nov 28, 1997 at 01:35:14PM +0000
References: <19971128004706.49234@uni-koblenz.de> <m0xbQZf-0005FsC@lightning.swansea.linux.org.uk>
Sender: owner-linux@cthulhu.engr.sgi.com
On Fri, Nov 28, 1997 at 01:35:14PM +0000, Alan Cox wrote:

>       Has anyone attempted to build the binutils fixed RPM with the old
> buggy binutils. Im trying this right now and Im getting

> Im now off to rebuild it from scratch with the static new linker to see what
> occurs

I just checked the binutils on my (Intel ...) laptop.  Libbfd contains
DT_NEEDED entries for libc.so.6.  This means that libbfd was linked
against libc which will make binutils 2.7 produce bad executables.

Suggested bootstrap procedure:

  - restore your old binutils 2.7 binaries
  - manually rebuild binutils 2.8.1 + patch.  When configuring binutils
    2.8.1 do not use the --enable-shared option, it will make binutils
    2.7 generate bad libraries.
  - install the binutils just built
  - You should now be able to rebuild the rpm without problems

  Ralf

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>