From: "Stefan Fröberg" <stefan.froberg@petroprogram.com>
To: buildroot@busybox.net
Subject: [Buildroot] Some questions about buildroot Target toolchain
Date: Tue, 28 Aug 2012 20:02:01 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <503CF989.7060909@petroprogram.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20120828175935.4fe0aa87@skate>
28.8.2012 18:59, Thomas Petazzoni kirjoitti:
> Hello,
>
> Le Tue, 28 Aug 2012 16:04:42 +0100,
> rechid miloi <in.hiring@gmail.com> a ?crit :
>
>> I've build my own Linux system for X86_64 using Buildroot/uclibc. I've
>> successfully added number of packages : libpam, openldap, clamav, ...etc.
>> However other package I wanna add can't be cross-compiled, so I decided to
>> compile TARGET_GCC and TARGET_DEVFILE into the system.
> Really, using the toolchain on the target is not the right solution.
> The right solution is to get your "other package" to cross-compile
> properly. What package is it?
>
>> The problem, is when (ld) try to link any object, I got the famous
>> "R_X86_64_PC32" ERROR.
>> I've tried to figure that out by :
>>
>> - Recompile all buildRoot with : -fPIC -DPIC
>> - Recompile all BuildRoot with : -pie
>> - Deactivate binary striping
>>
>> Without any result.
>>
>> However, I've tried to compile the "file" package with 'LDFLAG="-static"'
>> and It worked ! Sincerely I don't know why !
> Maybe because our target toolchain is broken with regard to shared
> libraries or something. Since the target toolchain is not really useful
> (Buildroot is meant to cross-compile things), almost none of the main
> Buildroot developers use it and test it, so we have had repeatedly
> reports of breakage. Unfortunately, none of the people reporting
> breakage, who should be the ones interested by this feature, have
> contributed fixes to improve the situation. At some point, we might
> even consider removing the possibility of generating a toolchain for
> the target in Buildroot, but this remains to be discussed.
I *might* volunteer to fix x86 target toolchain because I know for sure
that I need it in the future
because Im currently making my own uClibc based, buildroot assisted,
distro and that's why
having a native uClibc toolchain is crucial for me.
But not before I have keeped my soon to be starting, 3 weeks vacation.
So please Thomas, don't remove it just yet while im away :)
Stefan
> Best regards,
>
> Thomas
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-08-28 17:02 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <CAD4nNjU1cEJvd3LfwnKFDp12_11onm-vTc2JJidtWOz4vLuexg@mail.gmail.com>
2012-08-28 15:59 ` [Buildroot] Some questions about buildroot Target toolchain Thomas Petazzoni
2012-08-28 17:02 ` Stefan Fröberg [this message]
2012-08-28 17:19 ` Thomas Petazzoni
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=503CF989.7060909@petroprogram.com \
--to=stefan.froberg@petroprogram.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