From: Thomas Petazzoni <thomas.petazzoni@free-electrons.com>
To: buildroot@busybox.net
Subject: [Buildroot] [PATCH] autossh: honour LDFLAGS
Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2016 09:43:21 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20161129094321.656d1cb4@free-electrons.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20161129041655.GK14207@waldemar-brodkorb.de>
Hello,
On Tue, 29 Nov 2016 05:16:55 +0100, Waldemar Brodkorb wrote:
> > The --start-group/--end-group ask the linker to loop between -lgcc and
> > -lc until all unresolved symbols have been resolved. So
> > dl_iterate_phdr() being defined in the C library, but used in libgcc, I
> > guess the dynamic way (-lgcc -lc -lgcc) doesn't work.
>
> But why gcc behaves different?
> BR+gcc5+uClibc-ng-1.0.17 - no extra -static in LDFLAGS required
> BR+gcc5+musl+static - no extra -static in LDFLAGS required
> BR+gcc5+uClibc-ng-1.0.19 - extra -static required!
I would suspect it's a fallout of the "merge everything in libc"
change, but I really can't figure out why that would make a difference.
Could it be that with older uClibc versions, gcc was not finding the
dl_iterate_phdr symbol in uClibc, and therefore disabling the unwind
code, and now, due to a change in uClibc, gcc sees the dl_iterate_phdr
symbol, enables unwinding support, which cause this extra reference
from libgcc to libc?
You would have to compare the config.log of libgcc for
BR+gcc5+uClibc-ng-1.0.17 and BR+gcc5+uClibc-ng-1.0.19 to see what's the
difference.
Thomas
--
Thomas Petazzoni, CTO, Free Electrons
Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering
http://free-electrons.com
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-11-29 8:43 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-11-25 18:00 [Buildroot] [PATCH] autossh: honour LDFLAGS Waldemar Brodkorb
2016-11-28 21:28 ` Thomas Petazzoni
2016-11-28 23:22 ` Max Filippov
2016-11-29 4:16 ` Waldemar Brodkorb
2016-11-29 8:43 ` Thomas Petazzoni [this message]
2016-11-29 22:50 ` Max Filippov
2016-11-30 5:00 ` Waldemar Brodkorb
2016-12-01 18:20 ` Waldemar Brodkorb
2016-12-02 5:12 ` Max Filippov
2016-12-02 5:25 ` Waldemar Brodkorb
2016-12-03 2:12 ` Max Filippov
2016-12-04 12:06 ` Waldemar Brodkorb
2016-12-05 3:24 ` Max Filippov
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20161129094321.656d1cb4@free-electrons.com \
--to=thomas.petazzoni@free-electrons.com \
--cc=buildroot@busybox.net \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.