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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox