I run: crossdev --target i586-pc-linux-gnu and then the crossdev process fails on glibc-headers. It seems that glibc is incorrectly using my x86_64-pc-linux-gnu-gcc to test if the assembler supports TLS stuff. It uses ${CC-cc} to decide which computer to run in glibc-2.4/sysdeps/i386/elf/configure.in. It should, IMHO, directly call the i585-pc-linux-gnu-as from the already-installed cross binutils packages. I'll attach the logs crossdev asked for, but I think the following output is most interesting: An error in glibc's config.log: configure:7: checking for i386 TLS support configure:29: x86_64-pc-linux-gnu-gcc -c -pipe -march=athlon64 -ggdb -O2 -fno-strict-aliasing conftest.s 1>&5 conftest.s: Assembler messages: conftest.s:8: Error: @TLSLDM reloc is not supported with 64-bit output format conftest.s:8: Error: junk `@TLSLDM' after expression conftest.s:9: Error: relocated field and relocation type differ in signedness conftest.s:10: Error: relocated field and relocation type differ in signedness conftest.s:11: Error: relocated field and relocation type differ in signedness conftest.s:12: Error: @GOTNTPOFF reloc is not supported with 64-bit output format conftest.s:12: Error: junk `@GOTNTPOFF' after expression conftest.s:14: Error: @NTPOFF reloc is not supported with 64-bit output format conftest.s:14: Error: junk `@NTPOFF' after expression I tried compiling the excerpt found in glibc-2.4/sysdeps/i386/elf/configure.in with my system's x86_64-pc-linux-gnu-gcc and got the same error, but I got no error when specifying -m32. I have no idea what should happen (i.e., what a patch would contain) :-(.
Created attachment 188354 [details] log crossdev says to attach
Created attachment 188355 [details] cross-i586-pc-linux-gnu/glibc-2.4-r4 output The following lines from this attachment look interesting: ``running configure fragment for sysdeps/i386/elf checking for i386 TLS support... no running configure fragment for nptl/sysdeps/pthread''
Created attachment 188357 [details] glibc-2.4-r4 config.log
use glibc-2.9. we just dont have the resources to support anything other than latest stable+ (which is glibc-2.8+).
(In reply to comment #4) > use glibc-2.9. we just dont have the resources to support anything other than > latest stable+ (which is glibc-2.8+). > Sorry, I didn't realize that crossdev was using a very old version of glibc