From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: (from majordomo@localhost) by oss.sgi.com (8.11.2/8.11.3) id f793lK728963 for linux-mips-outgoing; Wed, 8 Aug 2001 20:47:20 -0700 Received: from ns1.ltc.com (ns1.ltc.com [38.149.17.165]) by oss.sgi.com (8.11.2/8.11.3) with SMTP id f793lGV28957 for ; Wed, 8 Aug 2001 20:47:16 -0700 Received: from prefect (gw1.ltc.com [38.149.17.163]) by ns1.ltc.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 77C76590AB for ; Wed, 8 Aug 2001 23:44:40 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <046001c12086$4ba02ee0$3501010a@ltc.com> From: "Bradley D. LaRonde" To: References: <02a401c12063$cde1e830$3501010a@ltc.com> <20010808164502.A6966@nevyn.them.org> <02ca01c12066$164e5570$3501010a@ltc.com> <040c01c1207d$78b62b90$3501010a@ltc.com> Subject: Re: gcc 3.0 / glibc 2.2.3 cross-toolchain Date: Wed, 8 Aug 2001 23:49:30 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2919.6600 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2919.6600 Sender: owner-linux-mips@oss.sgi.com Precedence: bulk I've chronicled my cross-toolchain mips-adventures at: http://www.ltc.com/~brad/mips/mipsel-linux-cross-toolchain-building.txt I included a copy of the glibc patch that has the MAP_BASE_ADDR fix in it in the same directory, namely: http://www.ltc.com/~brad/mips/ Regards, Brad ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bradley D. LaRonde" To: "Bradley D. LaRonde" ; "Daniel Jacobowitz" Cc: Sent: Wednesday, August 08, 2001 10:44 PM Subject: Re: gcc 3.0 / glibc 2.2.3 cross-toolchain > Woohoo! It works! Thanks! I was using H. J. Lu's first patch and that was > broken. I found the second patch and it worked, except it left the first > line in rtld-ldscript.in, when it really should have removed the file > entirely. Looks like it's right in the glibc CVS though. > > Regards, > Brad > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Bradley D. LaRonde" > To: "Daniel Jacobowitz" > Cc: > Sent: Wednesday, August 08, 2001 7:58 PM > Subject: Re: gcc 3.0 / glibc 2.2.3 cross-toolchain > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "Daniel Jacobowitz" > > To: "Bradley D. LaRonde" > > Cc: > > Sent: Wednesday, August 08, 2001 7:45 PM > > Subject: Re: gcc 3.0 / glibc 2.2.3 cross-toolchain > > > > > > > On Wed, Aug 08, 2001 at 07:42:17PM -0400, Bradley D. LaRonde wrote: > > > > I have spent quite a bit of time trying to get a gcc 3.0 / glibc 2.2.3 > > > > cross-toolchain working. I am not a Toolchain Builder, but I really > > wanted > > > > to try this combo and I don't see any way around building it myself. > > > > > > > > I've had some success. Everything seems to build fine. However, when > I > > try > > > > to run a simple "hello world" dynamically linked with glibc, I get > this: > > > > > > > > : error while loading shared libraries: failed to map > > > > segment from shared object: cannot load shared object file: > Invalid > > > > argument > > > > > > > > I think it is trying to load libc.so.6, which is in my root in /lib/, > > > > symlinked to libc-2.2.3.so, and so is ld.so.1, symlinked to > ld-2.2.3.so. > > > > > > > > I feel like I am pretty close, but I am starting to get discouraged > and > > > > could really use some help. I really am clueless about what > > > > should/shouldn't work. I'm trying to do this based on bits and pieces > > of > > > > information that I've collected from countless sources. I have heard > > that > > > > gcc 3.0 isn't really "working", but I still want to try. > > > > > > > > Here is what I've used: > > > > > > > > * binutils-2.11.90.0.25.tar.gz (extracted from H. J. Lu's > > > > srpm on oss.sgi.com; I've tried others also) > > > > * gcc-3.0.tar.gz (released version - no patches) > > > > * glibc-linuxthreads-2.2.3.tar.gz (released version - no > > > > patches; glibc didn't want to configure without this) > > > > * glibc-2.2.3.tar.gz (released version) > > > > > > You're missing the patch to change MAP_BASE_ADDR. You need that. > > > Something as simple as changing it to 0 will work for you, since you're > > > building everything yourself. > > > > I tried applying the patch that H. J. Lu posted on linux-mips that > contains > > that fix, but then glibc would compile. I'll try it again - maybe I > messed > > something up. If that doesn't work, I'll try the simple fix. Thanks. > > > > Regards, > > Brad From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Message-ID: <046001c12086$4ba02ee0$3501010a@ltc.com> From: "Bradley D. LaRonde" References: <02a401c12063$cde1e830$3501010a@ltc.com> <20010808164502.A6966@nevyn.them.org> <02ca01c12066$164e5570$3501010a@ltc.com> <040c01c1207d$78b62b90$3501010a@ltc.com> Subject: Re: gcc 3.0 / glibc 2.2.3 cross-toolchain Date: Wed, 8 Aug 2001 23:49:30 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-linux-mips@oss.sgi.com To: linux-mips@oss.sgi.com Message-ID: <20010809034930.qoHAYu_dG6KSBB_aN8ipj_VYq1f7lCJtSNmQ8Jy6JGU@z> I've chronicled my cross-toolchain mips-adventures at: http://www.ltc.com/~brad/mips/mipsel-linux-cross-toolchain-building.txt I included a copy of the glibc patch that has the MAP_BASE_ADDR fix in it in the same directory, namely: http://www.ltc.com/~brad/mips/ Regards, Brad ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bradley D. LaRonde" To: "Bradley D. LaRonde" ; "Daniel Jacobowitz" Cc: Sent: Wednesday, August 08, 2001 10:44 PM Subject: Re: gcc 3.0 / glibc 2.2.3 cross-toolchain > Woohoo! It works! Thanks! I was using H. J. Lu's first patch and that was > broken. I found the second patch and it worked, except it left the first > line in rtld-ldscript.in, when it really should have removed the file > entirely. Looks like it's right in the glibc CVS though. > > Regards, > Brad > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Bradley D. LaRonde" > To: "Daniel Jacobowitz" > Cc: > Sent: Wednesday, August 08, 2001 7:58 PM > Subject: Re: gcc 3.0 / glibc 2.2.3 cross-toolchain > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "Daniel Jacobowitz" > > To: "Bradley D. LaRonde" > > Cc: > > Sent: Wednesday, August 08, 2001 7:45 PM > > Subject: Re: gcc 3.0 / glibc 2.2.3 cross-toolchain > > > > > > > On Wed, Aug 08, 2001 at 07:42:17PM -0400, Bradley D. LaRonde wrote: > > > > I have spent quite a bit of time trying to get a gcc 3.0 / glibc 2.2.3 > > > > cross-toolchain working. I am not a Toolchain Builder, but I really > > wanted > > > > to try this combo and I don't see any way around building it myself. > > > > > > > > I've had some success. Everything seems to build fine. However, when > I > > try > > > > to run a simple "hello world" dynamically linked with glibc, I get > this: > > > > > > > > : error while loading shared libraries: failed to map > > > > segment from shared object: cannot load shared object file: > Invalid > > > > argument > > > > > > > > I think it is trying to load libc.so.6, which is in my root in /lib/, > > > > symlinked to libc-2.2.3.so, and so is ld.so.1, symlinked to > ld-2.2.3.so. > > > > > > > > I feel like I am pretty close, but I am starting to get discouraged > and > > > > could really use some help. I really am clueless about what > > > > should/shouldn't work. I'm trying to do this based on bits and pieces > > of > > > > information that I've collected from countless sources. I have heard > > that > > > > gcc 3.0 isn't really "working", but I still want to try. > > > > > > > > Here is what I've used: > > > > > > > > * binutils-2.11.90.0.25.tar.gz (extracted from H. J. Lu's > > > > srpm on oss.sgi.com; I've tried others also) > > > > * gcc-3.0.tar.gz (released version - no patches) > > > > * glibc-linuxthreads-2.2.3.tar.gz (released version - no > > > > patches; glibc didn't want to configure without this) > > > > * glibc-2.2.3.tar.gz (released version) > > > > > > You're missing the patch to change MAP_BASE_ADDR. You need that. > > > Something as simple as changing it to 0 will work for you, since you're > > > building everything yourself. > > > > I tried applying the patch that H. J. Lu posted on linux-mips that > contains > > that fix, but then glibc would compile. I'll try it again - maybe I > messed > > something up. If that doesn't work, I'll try the simple fix. Thanks. > > > > Regards, > > Brad