From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: by oss.sgi.com id ; Fri, 26 Jan 2001 17:51:00 -0800 Received: from pobox.sibyte.com ([208.12.96.20]:56077 "HELO pobox.sibyte.com") by oss.sgi.com with SMTP id ; Fri, 26 Jan 2001 17:50:37 -0800 Received: from postal.sibyte.com (moat.sibyte.com [208.12.96.21]) by pobox.sibyte.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 78607205FA for ; Fri, 26 Jan 2001 17:50:31 -0800 (PST) Received: from SMTP agent by mail gateway Fri, 26 Jan 2001 17:44:46 -0800 Received: from plugh.sibyte.com (plugh.sibyte.com [10.21.64.158]) by postal.sibyte.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 77D421595F for ; Fri, 26 Jan 2001 17:50:31 -0800 (PST) Received: by plugh.sibyte.com (Postfix, from userid 61017) id 8CEE1686D; Fri, 26 Jan 2001 17:50:49 -0800 (PST) From: Justin Carlson Reply-To: carlson@sibyte.com Organization: Sibyte To: linux-mips@oss.sgi.com Subject: GDB 5 for mips-linux/Shared library loading with new binutils/glibc Date: Fri, 26 Jan 2001 17:40:07 -0800 X-Mailer: KMail [version 1.0.29] Content-Type: text/plain MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: <0101261750492Y.00834@plugh.sibyte.com> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: owner-linux-mips@oss.sgi.com Precedence: bulk Return-Path: X-Orcpt: rfc822;linux-mips-outgoing Working with some pretty bleeding edge GNU tools, here, and there doesn't seem to be any support for mips-linux in GDB 5. Has anyone else run across this, and, if so, are there patches available somewhere? Also, I've run into a problem with ld.so from glibc-2.2 on mips32-linux. After some hunting, I found that the templates in elf32bsmip.sh for gnu ld have recently changed to support SHLIB_TEXT_START_ADDR as a (non-zero) base address for shared library loading. SHLIB_TEXT_START_ADDR defaults to 0x5ffe0000 in the current sources. I'm curious if anyone knows the rationale for these changes. Best conjecture I've heard is that it allows ld.so to not have to relocate itself, as it will load by default to the high address. However, ld.so seems to know nothing about relocating shared library with a non-zero shared library base address, which causes dynamically linked stuff to crash spectacularly. I think fixing ld.so won't be too difficult, but I'm really wanting to find out why these changes were made. And whether I'm reinventing some wheels by fixing ld.so to cope with the new binutils stuff. Anyone tread the ground before? binutils we're using is from CVS as of about Dec 17th. Glibc is also a snapshot from about the same time. -Justin