From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 10865 invoked by alias); 29 Jun 2006 02:24:50 -0000 Received: (qmail 10856 invoked by uid 22791); 29 Jun 2006 02:24:49 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from nevyn.them.org (HELO nevyn.them.org) (66.93.172.17) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31.1) with ESMTP; Thu, 29 Jun 2006 02:24:46 +0000 Received: from drow by nevyn.them.org with local (Exim 4.54) id 1FvmCy-0008PS-6U for binutils@sourceware.org; Wed, 28 Jun 2006 22:24:44 -0400 Date: Thu, 29 Jun 2006 05:50:00 -0000 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: binutils@sourceware.org Subject: Re: ld -m elf_i386 on x86 Solaris Message-ID: <20060629022444.GA32312@nevyn.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: binutils@sourceware.org References: <200606201323.58872.mike.wetherell@ntlworld.com> <20060623181238.GA30265@nevyn.them.org> <200606280942.57096.mike.wetherell@ntlworld.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <200606280942.57096.mike.wetherell@ntlworld.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.11+cvs20060403 Mailing-List: contact binutils-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: binutils-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2006-06/txt/msg00430.txt.bz2 On Wed, Jun 28, 2006 at 09:42:56AM +0100, Michael Wetherell wrote: > On Friday 23 Jun 2006 19:12, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote: > > > I've put a suggested fix below, which uses > > > targ_extra_libpath=elf_i386 instead of targ_extra_emuls=elf_i386: > > > > You're supposed to set both.  I've checked in a similar fix, thanks. > > Ok, if that's the convention. I think it is - everyone else seems to spell it that way. > >                          targ_extra_emuls="elf_i386 elf_x86_64" > > +                       targ_extra_libpath=$target_extra_emuls > > You have a typo in the name though ^^ :-( Sorry! I'm glad you noticed. > I'm preparing a patch for the 64-bit issues, so I'll include a fix in > there. Could you send it separately? That way it can be reviewed and applied independently of more complex changes. -- Daniel Jacobowitz CodeSourcery