From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 27285 invoked by alias); 4 Feb 2012 08:00:50 -0000 Received: (qmail 27276 invoked by uid 22791); 4 Feb 2012 08:00:49 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.1 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mail-out.m-online.net (HELO mail-out.m-online.net) (212.18.0.9) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Sat, 04 Feb 2012 08:00:34 +0000 Received: from frontend1.mail.m-online.net (unknown [192.168.8.180]) by mail-out.m-online.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 65B361C0C171; Sat, 4 Feb 2012 09:00:33 +0100 (CET) X-Auth-Info: +aYPmXCdFG9lgBoUlV0Vkb8iVX3JQCY2TNEkm+FWjus= Received: from linux.local (ppp-93-104-153-201.dynamic.mnet-online.de [93.104.153.201]) by mail.mnet-online.de (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 089681C0018B; Sat, 4 Feb 2012 09:00:32 +0100 (CET) Received: by linux.local (Postfix, from userid 501) id CB7351E5318; Sat, 4 Feb 2012 09:00:31 +0100 (CET) From: Andreas Schwab To: David Hagood Cc: binutils@sourceware.org Subject: Re: Weird error cross-compiling glibc with binutils 2.22 or head References: <34bc660d9f725c71ee7a72236bbdcd1f.squirrel@localhost> <1328313176.2972.16.camel@chumley> X-Yow: Now, my ENTIRE LIFE is flashing before my EYES as I park my DODGE DART in your EXXON service area for a COMPLETE LUBRICATION!! Date: Sat, 04 Feb 2012 08:00:00 -0000 In-Reply-To: <1328313176.2972.16.camel@chumley> (David Hagood's message of "Fri, 03 Feb 2012 17:52:56 -0600") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.0.93 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Mailing-List: contact binutils-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: binutils-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2012-02/txt/msg00037.txt.bz2 David Hagood writes: > Did you miss the part in my first post, > the bit I quoted in my second > post, the bit where I said "I have no idea where that is coming from: > it's not in any of the makefiles > for binutils, glibc, or gcc" That's exactly what you have to find out. It is absolutely obvious that this has nothing to do with binutils, because the erroneous line was explicitly written into linker script. Andreas. -- Andreas Schwab, schwab@linux-m68k.org GPG Key fingerprint = 58CA 54C7 6D53 942B 1756 01D3 44D5 214B 8276 4ED5 "And now for something completely different."