From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 27538 invoked by alias); 23 Jan 2012 21:08:54 -0000 Received: (qmail 27530 invoked by uid 22791); 23 Jan 2012 21:08:52 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.4 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FROM,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mail-pz0-f41.google.com (HELO mail-pz0-f41.google.com) (209.85.210.41) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Mon, 23 Jan 2012 21:08:39 +0000 Received: by dang27 with SMTP id g27so2208334dan.0 for ; Mon, 23 Jan 2012 13:08:39 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.68.74.72 with SMTP id r8mr24737947pbv.8.1327352919424; Mon, 23 Jan 2012 13:08:39 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.143.7.4 with HTTP; Mon, 23 Jan 2012 13:08:39 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <201201180528.36151.vapier@gentoo.org> References: <201201180528.36151.vapier@gentoo.org> Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2012 21:08:00 -0000 Message-ID: Subject: Re: libstdc++ configure fail due to -EL option From: Bryan Hundven To: Mike Frysinger Cc: crossgcc@sourceware.org, Zhenqiang Chen , Khem Raj Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact crossgcc-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: crossgcc-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2012-01/txt/msg00050.txt.bz2 On Wed, Jan 18, 2012 at 2:28 AM, Mike Frysinger wrote: > On Wednesday 18 January 2012 02:09:09 Zhenqiang Chen wrote: >> > -EL is only valid for mips gcc as far as ct-ng is concerned. It should >> > not be used for arm configurations since arm is little endian by >> > default pluis this is an invalid option you need >> > -mlittle-endian for arm if you really want to specify it explicitly. >> >> -EL/-EB is added in crosstool-ng automatically. Here is the code >> segment in scripts/functions >> >> CT_DoBuildTargetTuple() { >> =A0 =A0 # Set the endianness suffix, and the default endianness gcc opti= on >> =A0 =A0 case "${CT_ARCH_ENDIAN}" in >> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 big) >> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 target_endian_eb=3Deb >> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 target_endian_el=3D >> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 CT_ARCH_ENDIAN_CFLAG=3D"-mbig-endian" >> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 CT_ARCH_ENDIAN_LDFLAG=3D"-EB" >> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 ;; >> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 little) >> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 target_endian_eb=3D >> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 target_endian_el=3Del >> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 CT_ARCH_ENDIAN_CFLAG=3D"-mlittle-endian" >> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 CT_ARCH_ENDIAN_LDFLAG=3D"-EL" >> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 ;; >> =A0 =A0 esac > > LDFLAGS should take the form as needed by the compiler driver. =A0i.e. -W= l,-EL. Well, we'd get the same error if we pass -Wl,-EL to ld, where that would fix it for passing to gcc. Sounds like we should have: CT_ARCH_ENDIAN_GCC_LDFLAGS=3D"-Wl,${CT_ARCH_ENDIAN_LDFLAG}" for cases where we are passing LDFLAGS to gcc and not ld. > i'm guessing some other code takes care of transforming this before expor= ting > LDFLAGS to the build ? > -mike Not that I'm aware of. I'm running a test to see if that GCC_LDFLAGS is even needed or not. Thanks for the tip, Mike! -Bryan -- For unsubscribe information see http://sourceware.org/lists.html#faq