From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from cthulhu.engr.sgi.com (cthulhu.engr.sgi.com [192.26.80.2]) by neteng.engr.sgi.com (970903.SGI.8.8.7/960327.SGI.AUTOCF) via SMTP id MAA455825 for ; Tue, 6 Jan 1998 12:19:46 -0800 (PST) Return-Path: Received: (from majordomo-owner@localhost) by cthulhu.engr.sgi.com (950413.SGI.8.6.12/960327.SGI.AUTOCF) id MAA20494 for linux-list; Tue, 6 Jan 1998 12:18:30 -0800 Received: from sgi.sgi.com (sgi.engr.sgi.com [192.26.80.37]) by cthulhu.engr.sgi.com (950413.SGI.8.6.12/960327.SGI.AUTOCF) via ESMTP id MAA20485 for ; Tue, 6 Jan 1998 12:18:28 -0800 Received: from rachael.franken.de (rachael.franken.de [193.175.24.38]) by sgi.sgi.com (950413.SGI.8.6.12/970507) via ESMTP id MAA05804 for ; Tue, 6 Jan 1998 12:18:26 -0800 env-from (rachael.franken.de!hub-fue!alpha.franken.de!tsbogend) Received: from hub-fue by rachael.franken.de via rmail with uucp id for cthulhu.engr.sgi.com!linux; Tue, 6 Jan 1998 21:18:23 +0100 (MET) (Smail-3.2 1996-Jul-4 #4 built DST-Sep-8) Received: by hub-fue.franken.de (Smail3.1.29.1 #35) id m0xpfRx-002Og1C; Tue, 6 Jan 98 21:18 MET Received: (from tsbogend@localhost) by alpha.franken.de (8.8.7/8.8.5) id VAA01497; Tue, 6 Jan 1998 21:11:54 +0100 Message-ID: <19980106211154.11378@alpha.franken.de> Date: Tue, 6 Jan 1998 21:11:54 +0100 From: Thomas Bogendoerfer To: linux-mips@fnet.fr Cc: linux@cthulhu.engr.sgi.com Subject: Re: gcc -shared ... -lc ? References: <19980105184510.65220@alpha.franken.de> <19980105220916.59435@uni-koblenz.de> <19980106001619.35362@alpha.franken.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Mailer: Mutt 0.85 In-Reply-To: <19980106001619.35362@alpha.franken.de>; from Thomas Bogendoerfer on Tue, Jan 06, 1998 at 12:16:19AM +0100 Sender: owner-linux@cthulhu.engr.sgi.com Precedence: bulk On Tue, Jan 06, 1998 at 12:16:19AM +0100, Thomas Bogendoerfer wrote: > > > So it looks like the ld for alpha and i386 don't include the whole libc > > > when linked with the comand line above. Any hints ? > > > > This is a binutils 2.7 bug. Upgrading to 2.8.1 solves the problem. > > this is with binutils-2.8.1 Ok, I've found the problem. The installed binutils are 2.8.1, but the binutils gcc used were 2.7. They got used by gcc, because they were in /usr/mipsel-linux/bin. I've removed them and all works fine now. Sorry for the false alarm. Thomas. -- See, you not only have to be a good coder to create a system like Linux, you have to be a sneaky bastard too ;-) [Linus Torvalds in <4rikft$7g5@linux.cs.Helsinki.FI>]