| To: | Eric DeVolder <edevolder@razamicroelectronics.com> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | RE: Differing results from cross and native compilers |
| From: | Jim Wilson <wilson@specifix.com> |
| Date: | Tue, 19 Sep 2006 16:22:59 -0700 |
| Cc: | Thiemo Seufer <ths@networkno.de>, linux-mips@linux-mips.org |
| In-reply-to: | <2E96546B3C2C8B4CA739323C6058204A0163548C@hq-ex-mb01.razamicroelectronics.com> |
| Original-recipient: | rfc822;linux-mips@linux-mips.org |
| References: | <2E96546B3C2C8B4CA739323C6058204A0163548C@hq-ex-mb01.razamicroelectronics.com> |
| Sender: | linux-mips-bounce@linux-mips.org |
On Tue, 2006-09-19 at 09:57 -0700, Eric DeVolder wrote: > - lw $4,%got($LC0)($28) > + la $4,$LC0 The difference here is -mexplicit-relocs, which is the default for the first one (cross) but not the second one (native). The explicit-reloc support is enabled by a run-time configure test, which tries to run the assembler to see if you have a new enough version of GNU as that supports the necessary assembler reloc syntax. Apparently this is going wrong with the native build. Perhaps you have a different binutils version, or perhaps there is a problem with your PATH, or perhaps binutils and gcc weren't configured with the same prefix, etc. If you have the build trees, you can look at the gcc/config.h files and note that one has HAVE_AS_EXPLICIT_RELOCS defined and the other doesn't. -- Jim Wilson, GNU Tools Support, http://www.specifix.com |
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Re: [PATCH] fstatat syscall names, Ralf Baechle |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | linux-libc-headers-2.6.17.0, sathesh babu |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: Differing results from cross and native compilers, David Daney |
| Next by Thread: | RE: Differing results from cross and native compilers, Eric DeVolder |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |