From a5b95baab6b4512ceaef8749a29ed7b3685b4125 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Thomas Schwinge Date: Wed, 15 Jun 2011 22:54:09 +0200 Subject: Some more bits from IRC and elsewhere. --- toolchain/elfosabi_hurd.mdwn | 83 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 83 insertions(+) create mode 100644 toolchain/elfosabi_hurd.mdwn (limited to 'toolchain') diff --git a/toolchain/elfosabi_hurd.mdwn b/toolchain/elfosabi_hurd.mdwn new file mode 100644 index 00000000..4d60f761 --- /dev/null +++ b/toolchain/elfosabi_hurd.mdwn @@ -0,0 +1,83 @@ +[[!meta copyright="Copyright © 2011 Free Software Foundation, Inc."]] + +[[!meta license="""[[!toggle id="license" text="GFDL 1.2+"]][[!toggleable +id="license" text="Permission is granted to copy, distribute and/or modify this +document under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License, Version 1.2 or +any later version published by the Free Software Foundation; with no Invariant +Sections, no Front-Cover Texts, and no Back-Cover Texts. A copy of the license +is included in the section entitled [[GNU Free Documentation +License|/fdl]]."]]"""]] + +[[!meta title="ELFOSABI_HURD"]] + +[[!tag open_issue_binutils open_issue_glibc]] + + +# [[!debbug 630180]] + + +# [[open_issues/binutils]] commit 51b2f560ad035dffad3371093f8e5c80608d196c + +Usage of `ELFOSABI_LINUX`/`STB_GNU_UNIQUE`. Has also been wrong before already +with respect to `STT_GNU_IFUNC`? + + +# IRC + +IRC, freenode, #debian-hurd, 2011-06-11 + + youpi: not that there would be any hope in that, but id you try + asking doko about the gcc miscompiling (wrong elf format) issue? + I didn't + I'm still investigating + maybe it's a binutils change actually + youpi: hm, are you sure it could be binutils? after all, even + some .o files are produced with format gnu/linux, so there's no binutils + involved up to that point of thecompilation yet? + as is + "as", I mean + i see + since it's so unclear, I really prefer to investigate before + bothering doko + youpi: maybe i could be wrong, + in binutils, bfd/elf.c, around lines 9580 + the faulty thing seems to be gnu_unique_object in the source .s + file produced by g++ + that's what that comment (which changed wrt binutils from eg + march) says + seems to concur with my comment above :) + http://paste.debian.net/119542/ ‘¡û extract of diff + ok, that really seems the culprit + starting reportbug + who's the fault then? + binutils + it shouldn't hardcode LINUX + g++ emitting those symbols, or binutil considering them "linux"? + it's a GNU thing, not a Linux thing + ah ok + it's the same dynamic linker actually + youpi: http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=10549 + see the reporter :) + heh + youpi: see also gas/config/obj-elf.c:1725 + (another change related to that bug, it seems) + +IRC, freenode, #hurd, 2011-06-15 + + also I still get an "ELF file OS ABI invalid" error with binutils + 2.21.52.20110606-2+hurd.1, is that expected? + tschwinge: oops, the OS ABI invalid is actually due to the file + being marked GNU/Hurd + I guess the linker is simply not aware that it should accept + GNU/Hurd + youpi: So we got to work on glibc'S ld.so to teach it aboput + the Hurd OS ABI? (Or probably simply make that equivalent to the Linux + one?) + probably simply an equivalent + ELFOSABI_HURD is missing from elf/elf.h, for a start... + linux' glibc has tests in lsdodefs.h + the VALID_ELF_OSABI macro + it's thus apparently a matter of providing an ldsodefs.h file with + VALID_ELF_HEADER, VALID_ELF_OSABI and VALID_ELF_ABIVERSION definitions + (and include_next the generic one) + I've prepared a patch for ldsodefs.h, I'll test it -- cgit v1.2.3