Gentoo Websites Logo
Go to: Gentoo Home Documentation Forums Lists Bugs Planet Store Wiki Get Gentoo!
Bug 392645 - sys-devel/binutils-2.22: executables are built with TEXTRELs on ppc32 systems
Summary: sys-devel/binutils-2.22: executables are built with TEXTRELs on ppc32 systems
Status: RESOLVED FIXED
Alias: None
Product: Gentoo Linux
Classification: Unclassified
Component: [OLD] Core system (show other bugs)
Hardware: PPC Linux
: Normal normal (vote)
Assignee: Gentoo Toolchain Maintainers
URL: http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_b...
Whiteboard:
Keywords:
: 392353 392355 392357 392495 392497 392499 392501 392503 392505 392507 392509 392511 392513 392515 392517 392519 392521 392523 392525 392527 392529 392531 392533 392535 392537 392539 392543 392545 392547 392551 392563 (view as bug list)
Depends on: 392353 392355 392357 392495 392497 392499 392501 392503 392505 392507 392509 392511 392513 392515 392517 392519 392521 392523 392525 392527 392529 392531 392533 392535 392537 392539 392543 392545 392547 392551 392563
Blocks:
  Show dependency tree
 
Reported: 2011-11-30 16:38 UTC by Jeroen Roovers (RETIRED)
Modified: 2011-12-03 01:46 UTC (History)
2 users (show)

See Also:
Package list:
Runtime testing required: ---

Attachments
build.log of "ebuild portage-utils-0.6.ebuild compile" (build.log,1.31 KB, text/plain)
2011-12-01 00:05 UTC, hiyuh 		Details
output of "gcc -dumpspecs" (gcc-dumpspecs.log,15.25 KB, text/plain)
2011-12-01 00:13 UTC, hiyuh 		Details
gcc log for test.c (test.log,16.54 KB, text/plain)
2011-12-02 01:14 UTC, hiyuh 		Details
View All Add an attachment (proposed patch, testcase, etc.)

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description Jeroen Roovers (RETIRED) gentoo-dev 2011-11-30 16:38:02 UTC 
No chat here, please, unless it's meta.
Comment 1 Jeroen Roovers (RETIRED) gentoo-dev 2011-11-30 18:05:27 UTC 
Seems to be all PPC specific.
Comment 2 SpanKY gentoo-dev 2011-11-30 18:10:24 UTC 
we do not track TEXTRELs in executables for obvious reason
Comment 3 SpanKY gentoo-dev 2011-11-30 18:11:45 UTC 
*** Bug 392353 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Comment 4 SpanKY gentoo-dev 2011-11-30 18:12:48 UTC 
*** Bug 392355 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Comment 5 SpanKY gentoo-dev 2011-11-30 18:14:39 UTC 
*** Bug 392357 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Comment 6 SpanKY gentoo-dev 2011-11-30 18:14:40 UTC 
*** Bug 392495 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Comment 7 SpanKY gentoo-dev 2011-11-30 18:14:40 UTC 
*** Bug 392497 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Comment 8 SpanKY gentoo-dev 2011-11-30 18:14:41 UTC 
*** Bug 392499 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Comment 9 SpanKY gentoo-dev 2011-11-30 18:14:45 UTC 
*** Bug 392501 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Comment 10 SpanKY gentoo-dev 2011-11-30 18:14:47 UTC 
*** Bug 392503 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Comment 11 SpanKY gentoo-dev 2011-11-30 18:14:50 UTC 
*** Bug 392505 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Comment 12 SpanKY gentoo-dev 2011-11-30 18:14:53 UTC 
*** Bug 392507 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Comment 13 SpanKY gentoo-dev 2011-11-30 18:14:57 UTC 
*** Bug 392509 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Comment 14 SpanKY gentoo-dev 2011-11-30 18:14:59 UTC 
*** Bug 392511 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Comment 15 SpanKY gentoo-dev 2011-11-30 18:15:02 UTC 
*** Bug 392513 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Comment 16 SpanKY gentoo-dev 2011-11-30 18:15:05 UTC 
*** Bug 392515 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Comment 17 SpanKY gentoo-dev 2011-11-30 18:15:07 UTC 
*** Bug 392517 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Comment 18 SpanKY gentoo-dev 2011-11-30 18:15:13 UTC 
*** Bug 392519 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Comment 19 SpanKY gentoo-dev 2011-11-30 18:15:44 UTC 
*** Bug 392521 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Comment 20 SpanKY gentoo-dev 2011-11-30 18:15:45 UTC 
*** Bug 392523 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Comment 21 SpanKY gentoo-dev 2011-11-30 18:15:47 UTC 
*** Bug 392525 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Comment 22 SpanKY gentoo-dev 2011-11-30 18:15:48 UTC 
*** Bug 392527 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Comment 23 SpanKY gentoo-dev 2011-11-30 18:15:49 UTC 
*** Bug 392529 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Comment 24 SpanKY gentoo-dev 2011-11-30 18:15:50 UTC 
*** Bug 392531 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Comment 25 SpanKY gentoo-dev 2011-11-30 18:15:50 UTC 
*** Bug 392533 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Comment 26 SpanKY gentoo-dev 2011-11-30 18:15:51 UTC 
*** Bug 392535 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Comment 27 SpanKY gentoo-dev 2011-11-30 18:15:52 UTC 
*** Bug 392537 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Comment 28 SpanKY gentoo-dev 2011-11-30 18:15:52 UTC 
*** Bug 392539 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Comment 29 SpanKY gentoo-dev 2011-11-30 18:15:54 UTC 
*** Bug 392543 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Comment 30 SpanKY gentoo-dev 2011-11-30 18:15:55 UTC 
*** Bug 392545 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Comment 31 SpanKY gentoo-dev 2011-11-30 18:15:56 UTC 
*** Bug 392547 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Comment 32 SpanKY gentoo-dev 2011-11-30 18:15:58 UTC 
*** Bug 392551 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Comment 33 SpanKY gentoo-dev 2011-11-30 18:15:59 UTC 
*** Bug 392563 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Comment 34 SpanKY gentoo-dev 2011-11-30 20:10:28 UTC 
hiyuh: please post a full build log from one of the smaller packages like app-portage/portage-utils

also post the output of:
  file -L /bin/sh /usr/bin/q

and the output of:
  emerge -qpv sys-devel/gcc
  gcc-config -l
  gcc -dumpspecs
Comment 35 hiyuh 2011-12-01 00:05:59 UTC 
Created attachment 294401 [details]
build.log of "ebuild portage-utils-0.6.ebuild compile"
Comment 36 hiyuh 2011-12-01 00:12:07 UTC 
(In reply to comment #34)
> hiyuh: please post a full build log from one of the smaller packages like
> app-portage/portage-utils

attached by prev comment.

> also post the output of:
>   file -L /bin/sh /usr/bin/q

hiyuh@wombat ~ $ file -L /bin/sh /usr/bin/q
/bin/sh:    ELF 32-bit MSB executable, PowerPC or cisco 4500, version 1 (SYSV), dynamically linked (uses shared libs), for GNU/Linux 2.6.9, with unknown capability 0x41000000 = 0x13676e75, with unknown capability 0x10000 = 0xb0401, stripped
/usr/bin/q: ELF 32-bit MSB executable, PowerPC or cisco 4500, version 1 (SYSV), dynamically linked (uses shared libs), for GNU/Linux 2.6.9, with unknown capability 0x41000000 = 0x13676e75, with unknown capability 0x10000 = 0xb0401, stripped

> and the output of:
>   emerge -qpv sys-devel/gcc

hiyuh@wombat ~ $ emerge -qpv sys-devel/gcc
[ebuild   R   ] sys-devel/gcc-4.5.3-r1  USE="altivec cxx fortran graphite lto mudflap nls nptl openmp -bootstrap -build -doc (-fixed-point) -gcj -gtk (-hardened) (-libffi) (-multilib) -multislot -nocxx -nopie -nossp -objc -objc++ -objc-gc -test -vanilla"

>   gcc-config -l

hiyuh@wombat ~ $ gcc-config -l
 [1] powerpc-unknown-linux-gnu-4.5.3 *

>   gcc -dumpspecs

attached by next comment.
Comment 37 hiyuh 2011-12-01 00:13:49 UTC 
Created attachment 294403 [details]
output of "gcc -dumpspecs"
Comment 38 SpanKY gentoo-dev 2011-12-01 05:39:47 UTC 
post the output from running:

echo 'main(){}' > test.c
powerpc-unknown-linux-gnu-gcc -Os -mcpu=G4 -mtune=G4 -maltivec -mabi=altivec \
  -Wall -std=gnu99 -Wl,-O1 -Wl,--as-needed test.c -v -Wl,--verbose

if you downgrade to ~binutils-2.21.1, do you get warnings ?
Comment 39 hiyuh 2011-12-02 01:14:01 UTC 
Created attachment 294467 [details]
gcc log for test.c
Comment 40 hiyuh 2011-12-02 01:49:23 UTC 
(In reply to comment #38)
> post the output from running:
> 
> echo 'main(){}' > test.c
> powerpc-unknown-linux-gnu-gcc -Os -mcpu=G4 -mtune=G4 -maltivec -mabi=altivec \
>   -Wall -std=gnu99 -Wl,-O1 -Wl,--as-needed test.c -v -Wl,--verbose

attached by prev comment.

> if you downgrade to ~binutils-2.21.1, do you get warnings ?

after downgrading binutils-2.21.1-r1,　there is no DT_TEXTREL warning.
so, 2.22 is broken?
Comment 41 SpanKY gentoo-dev 2011-12-03 01:46:09 UTC 
ive queued the fix.  once Bug 391899 gets fixed, i'll push out 2.22-r1.

http://sources.gentoo.org/gentoo/src/patchsets/binutils/2.22/10_all_binutils-2.22-ppc-textrels.patch?rev=1.1