Re: What all should I take care while compiling and running?

[Pramod P K <pra dot engr at gmail dot com>]

Hi,

When I do:
# file a.out
on old (running) binary, it shows :
a.out: ELF 32-bit LSB executable, ARM, version 1 (SYSV), for GNU/Linux
2.4.17, dynamically linked (uses shared libs), not stripped
Which has " GNU/Linux 2.4.17 "  clearly diffrent from the new one
("GNU/Linux 2.4.3") , as Chuck said.


I made changes to "crosstool.sh" in  crosstool-0.38:
.....
--enable-kernel=2.4.17
......

which was
--enable-kernel=2.4.3
earlier. Then I build new toolchain arm-9tdmi-linux-gnu.

Using new arm-9tdmi-linux-gnu I built, I do :

# arm-9tdmi-linux-gnu-gcc -static hello.c
# ./a.out
Illegal instruction
# file a.out
a.out: ELF 32-bit LSB executable, ARM, version 1 (ARM), for GNU/Linux
2.4.17, statically linked, not stripped

# arm-9tdmi-linux-gnu-gcc -shared hello.c
# ./a.out
Segmentation fault
# file ./a.out gives
a.out: ELF 32-bit LSB shared object, ARM, version 1 (ARM), not stripped

# arm-9tdmi-linux-gnu-gcc testcpro.c
# ./a.out
-sh: ./a.out: not found
# file a.out
a.out: ELF 32-bit LSB executable, ARM, version 1 (ARM), for GNU/Linux
2.4.17, dynamically linked (uses shared libs), not stripped

Here I can find another notable difference:
" ARM, version 1 (SYSV), "
and
" ARM, version 1 (ARM), "

I hv tried with " --enable-kernel=2.6.10 " in " crosstool.sh " also.

Plz tell me the possibilities

Thanx
Pramod P K




On 11/9/05, Chuck Meade <chuckmeade@mindspring.com> wrote:
> Hi Pramod,
>
> > >Question to the original poster -- what is the binary format of your >a.out
> > >file?  If it truly is in a.out format, then was your kernel
> > configured to >handle
> > >the a.out binary format?
> >
> > Its ELF .
> > Yeah... sure, coz I can run the a.out of the same program; compiled
> > using the existing (old) GCC in the TARGET.
>
> I verified that those are indeed elf ARM binaries.  However they are built
> with a toolset that is compatible with Linux 2.4.3 -- quite old tools.
> See the output when I run "file" on the files you sent:
>
> # file arm*
> arm-9tdmi-linux-gnu-hello:        ELF 32-bit LSB executable, ARM, version 1 (ARM), for GNU/Linux 2.4.3, dynamically linked (uses
> shared libs), not stripped
> arm-9tdmi-linux-gnu-hello-static: ELF 32-bit LSB executable, ARM, version 1 (ARM), for GNU/Linux 2.4.3, statically linked, not
> stripped
>
> Note the "for GNU/Linux 2.4.3".  Check your working a.out file the same
> way (use the file command on it).  I bet you will see a substantially
> different version number than 2.4.3.  Considering that that kernel
> is from March 2001, you can bet that a lot has changed since then in
> the kernel, in gcc, glibc, and binutils.
>
> You stated that you are using 2.6.10 as your kernel.  But you also stated
> that your older tool versions worked.  Check this to make sure -- it would
> be logical that your tools that are capable of building 2.6.10 would be
> *newer* than your tools which produce binaries that claim to be "for
> GNU/Linux 2.4.3".  Tools generating binaries compatible with 2.4.3 are
> plenty old.
>
> Note that by new/old here we are referring to dates associated with tool
> versions, not the dates on which you personally built your cross toolsets.
>
> To sum up -- you have a tool version problem.  You need to look closely at
> your versions.  You know that the non-working binaries say they are
> "for GNU/Linux 2.4.3".  It would be interesting to see the output of the file
> command on your working application binary.  Then pick tools that work and
> use them consistently and you should be ok.
>
> Chuck
>
>
>


--
----------------------------------------------------------------
  PRAMOD P. K., <pra.engr@gmail.com>

  CDMA: 91- 9242195490.
----------------------------------------------------------------

------
Want more information?  See the CrossGCC FAQ, http://www.objsw.com/CrossGCC/
Want to unsubscribe? Send a note to crossgcc-unsubscribe@sources.redhat.com