Re: [PATCH] libgcc: Mark libgcc_s as executable to ensure its stripped

[Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>]

On Mon, 2013-03-04 at 12:06 -0800, Khem Raj wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 3, 2013 at 9:04 AM, Richard Purdie
> <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> > libgcc_s is not marked as executable and hence it doesn't get stripped. This
> > means its about 1MB larger than it needs to be. There is no good reason it
> > shouldn't get stripped so ensure it does and mark as executable.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>
> > ---
> > diff --git a/meta/recipes-devtools/gcc/libgcc_4.7.bb b/meta/recipes-devtools/gcc/libgcc_4.7.bb
> > index 47669a2..6a0931f 100644
> > --- a/meta/recipes-devtools/gcc/libgcc_4.7.bb
> > +++ b/meta/recipes-devtools/gcc/libgcc_4.7.bb
> > @@ -57,6 +57,9 @@ do_install () {
> >         # install the runtime in /usr/lib/ not in /usr/lib/gcc on target
> >         # so that cross-gcc can find it in the sysroot
> >
> > +       # Ensure libs are executable else they aren't stripped
> > +       chmod a+x ${D}/${base_libdir}/*
> > +
> 
> hmmm, while this solves the issue I think better fix would for
> stripper to know that its a shared object
> and can be stripped. Marking libraries with exe (except ld.so which
> can execute on its own) seems not
> right to me.

Agreed, I've pushed something which addresses the root cause in
package.bbclass.

Cheers,

Richard