From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Ferruh Yigit <ferruh.yigit@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mk: fix ABI versioning compile error for
	combined	shared library
Date: Mon, 2 Nov 2015 10:20:23 +0000
Message-ID: <20151102102023.GA29052@sivlogin002.ir.intel.com>
References: <1706989.WgznurFLZ8@xps13> <4489406.qekDmzhmkY@xps13>
 <20151102000517.GA4669@sivlogin002.ir.intel.com> <4832819.EtRlJavyLu@xps13>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Cc: dev@dpdk.org, Eric Kinzie <ekinzie@brocade.com>
To: Thomas Monjalon <thomas.monjalon@6wind.com>
Return-path: <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>
Received: from mga01.intel.com (mga01.intel.com [192.55.52.88])
 by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 03A0E8E9A
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Mon,  2 Nov 2015 11:20:29 +0100 (CET)
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <4832819.EtRlJavyLu@xps13>
List-Id: patches and discussions about DPDK <dev.dpdk.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://dpdk.org/ml/options/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:dev@dpdk.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://dpdk.org/ml/listinfo/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org
Sender: "dev" <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>

On Mon, Nov 02, 2015 at 08:10:25AM +0100, Thomas Monjalon wrote:
> 2015-11-02 00:05, Ferruh Yigit:
> > On Mon, Nov 02, 2015 at 12:24:51AM +0100, Thomas Monjalon wrote:
> > > >  ifeq ($(LINK_USING_CC),1)
> > > >  # Override the definition of LD here, since we're linking with CC
> > > >  LD := $(CC) $(CPU_CFLAGS)
> > > > -O_TO_S = $(LD) $(call linkerprefix,$(CPU_LDFLAGS)) \
> > > > +O_TO_S = $(LD) $(call linkerprefix,$(SHARED_LDFLAGS)) \
> > > >  	-shared $(OBJS) -o $(RTE_OUTPUT)/lib/$(LIB_ONE)
> > > >  else
> > > > -O_TO_S = $(LD) $(CPU_LDFLAGS) \
> > > > +O_TO_S = $(LD) $(SHARED_LDFLAGS) \
> > > >  	-shared $(OBJS) -o $(RTE_OUTPUT)/lib/$(LIB_ONE)
> > > >  endif
> > > 
> > > Why do you remove CPU_LDFLAGS?
> > 
> > CPU_LDFLAGS shared by other libraries and confilicts with this usage.
> 
> Sorry I don't understand.
> CPU_LDFLAGS is -melf_i386 for Intel 32-bit.
> Why removing it for combined library? What is the conflict?

When combined shared option enabled, CPP_LDFLAGS will be processed and other libraries
CPU_LDFLAGS value will contain this value, and generate an compilation eroor like following:

"
gcc -m64 -Wl,--version-script=./lib/libdpdk.map -Wl,--version-script=/root/dpdk/lib/librte_eal/linuxapp/eal/rte_eal_version.map -shared <objs> -Wl,-soname,librte_eal.so.2.1 -o librte_eal.so.2.1
/usr/bin/ld: cannot open linker script file ./lib/libdpdk.map: No such file or directory
collect2: error: ld returned 1 exit status
"

That is why I have created a new variable, and CPU_LDFLAGS was empty,
but with double check what CPU_LDFLAGS is, it should stay there,

I will update the patch, at worst I can add a new flag instead of replacing CPU_LDFLAGS

Regards,
ferruh