From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Thomas Petazzoni Date: Sat, 22 Feb 2014 23:43:21 +0100 Subject: [Buildroot] [PATCH] binutils: install libiberty In-Reply-To: <1393108410-9568-1-git-send-email-arnout@mind.be> References: <1393108410-9568-1-git-send-email-arnout@mind.be> Message-ID: <20140222234321.3f8b7f8a@skate> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: buildroot@busybox.net Dear Arnout Vandecappelle (Essensium/Mind), On Sat, 22 Feb 2014 23:33:30 +0100, Arnout Vandecappelle (Essensium/Mind) wrote: > Some packages (actually, just oprofile) need to link against libiberty. > This option just installs libiberty.a so it has no effect on the target, > therefore it's not needed to add a config option for it. > > Before binutils-2.24, there was a bug in libiberty/Makefile.in that > caused libiberty to be installed regardless of the > --enable-install-libiberty option. This problem wasn't noticed before > because binutils-2.24 is not selected on any of the autobuilders: the > version can only be selected if an internal toolchain is used, and it > defaults to 2.21. > > Signed-off-by: Arnout Vandecappelle (Essensium/Mind) > --- > package/binutils/binutils.mk | 1 + > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+) I believe this might fix: http://autobuild.buildroot.org/results/be1/be199b97dcdaf28a8fef9d90953115a005baa173/build-end.log If someone could verify this, maybe this patch could be committed to master. On Microblaze, a non-default binutils version is used, and the version is fairly recent, most likely a 2.24-something version (we actually use a git commit). Best regards, Thomas -- Thomas Petazzoni, CTO, Free Electrons Embedded Linux, Kernel and Android engineering http://free-electrons.com