From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 19471 invoked by alias); 1 Apr 2008 10:55:24 -0000 Received: (qmail 19463 invoked by uid 22791); 1 Apr 2008 10:55:23 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from oslproxyp1.tandberg.com (HELO oslproxyp1.tandberg.com) (194.0.215.2) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Tue, 01 Apr 2008 10:55:06 +0000 Received: from OSLEXCP11.eu.tandberg.int (oslexcp11.eu.tandberg.int [10.47.136.43]) by oslproxyp1.tandberg.com (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id m31At2mE005562; Tue, 1 Apr 2008 12:55:02 +0200 Received: from HGBakkenPC.rd.tandberg.com ([10.47.3.149]) by OSLEXCP11.eu.tandberg.int with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Tue, 1 Apr 2008 12:55:02 +0200 Received: from HGBakkenPC.rd.tandberg.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by HGBakkenPC.rd.tandberg.com (8.14.2/8.14.1) with ESMTP id m31At2cn030713; Tue, 1 Apr 2008 12:55:02 +0200 Received: (from hgb@localhost) by HGBakkenPC.rd.tandberg.com (8.14.2/8.14.2/Submit) id m31At2vn030712; Tue, 1 Apr 2008 12:55:02 +0200 To: Kai Ruottu Cc: Andrew Haley , Martin Guy , gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org Subject: Re: Problem with exceptions on arm References: <56d259a00804010255n7d7ec931o28ab5af9d39d798f@mail.gmail.com> <47F207C7.2070903@redhat.com> <47F20D74.8060405@wippies.com> From: Henrik Grindal Bakken Date: Tue, 01 Apr 2008 11:04:00 -0000 In-Reply-To: <47F20D74.8060405@wippies.com> (Kai Ruottu's message of "Tue\, 01 Apr 2008 13\:24\:52 +0300") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/22.1 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Mailing-List: contact gcc-help-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-help-owner@gcc.gnu.org X-SW-Source: 2008-04/txt/msg00011.txt.bz2 Kai Ruottu writes: > Andrew Haley wrote: > >> Is there something weird going on here, like different libraries >> in x-host and target? > > Nice to see someone else suspecting weirdness in the current > ideas. The first message in this thread told : > > "This is part of a larger script setting up a cross-compiling > toolchain. binutils, glibc and a first-stage gcc for arm is > already built at this point. I have tried gcc-4.2.2 and gcc-4.2.3. > Our codebase isn't quite ready for 4.3 yet... > > When I run on target, a simple test program with exceptions fail:" > > The weird thing here is that installing the produced glibc runtime > onto the target isn't mentioned. People produce glibc when the > target yet hasn't it, if it has it then there is no reason to try to > create that "byte-by-byte identical" target C library... That was certainly a piece of info missing from my emails. The libraries from the cross-compiling toolchains are copied to target. All .so files and relevant symlinks (perhaps skipping a few we don't need) are copied from the "lib" subdirectory in the toolchain. They are, however, first stripped (just running arm-linuxeabi-strip, not with -g), but I see the same behaviour when I skip this step. As far as I can see, the .so files on target /lib match the ones from lib in my toolchain. -- Henrik Grindal Bakken PGP ID: 8D436E52 Fingerprint: 131D 9590 F0CF 47EF 7963 02AF 9236 D25A 8D43 6E52