[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Problems with binary file formats...

Subject: Re: Problems with binary file formats...
From: Systemkennung Linux <>
Date: Sun, 21 Jan 1996 19:14:40 +0100 (MET)
In-reply-to: <> from "Paul Antoine" at Jan 21, 96 04:52:01 pm

> For some time I have been using my own versions of as, ar, ld, ranlib und
> so weiter, which I'd compiled from the gnu 2.5.1 sources for DEC Ultrix 
> MIPS ECOFF as default output (i.e. ecoff-littlemips).
> I've been working on getting my DECStation Linux development environment
> in order in preparation for release to the unsuspecting masses, and have 
> been trying to use your release of the 2.5.2-2 binutils to do this (I had 
> a peer at objdump from this release of yours, and it appears to handle 
> ecoff-littlemips).

The COFF stuff hasn't been debugged very intensivly.  The only reason why
there is COFF support at all in the Linux/MIPS binutils is that ARC
BIOSes can only execute COFF executables.  Aside of this vanilla binutils
2.5.2 is very buggy and pre 2.5.2 is that buggy that it qualifies as a
nightmare.  I suggest that you try 2.6-1 which fixes all the COFF problems
I found.

> Now, after much experimenting, I have found that the resultant vmlinux
> binary using 2.5.2-2 binutils is of type:
>       mipsel executable not stripped
> as reported by file.  However, when I compile and link using my versions
> of as, ld, etc. I get a vmlinux of the type:
>       mipsel executable not stripped - version 2.11
> The difference?  Well, the sizes are different, and the 2.5.2-2 one does
> not seem to produce an sbss section.  Oh yeah... and the DEC will only 
> boot the 2.11 binary :-)

Sorry, but I have no idea what the difference between version 2.11 and
other versions of DECstation executables is :-(

> Any ideas?  When I compiled the 2.5.1 binutils I compiled for cross-dev
> from i486-linux to dec-ultrix...

Hmm, again I suggest to try if binutils 2.6-1 fix your problem.

> Arrrrghhhh!

Also arrrrghhhh,


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