This is the mail archive of the
libc-alpha@sourceware.cygnus.com
mailing list for the glibc project.
Re: [Michael Deutschmann <michael@talamasca.wkpowerlink.com>] Re: libc/1308: Build fails due to broken ld.so
- To: Andreas Jaeger <aj at suse dot de>
- Subject: Re: [Michael Deutschmann <michael@talamasca.wkpowerlink.com>] Re: libc/1308: Build fails due to broken ld.so
- From: Franz Sirl <Franz dot Sirl-kernel at lauterbach dot com>
- Date: Mon, 27 Sep 1999 18:18:42 +0200
- Cc: "GNU C. library Alpha Tester List" <libc-alpha at sourceware dot cygnus dot com>,Michael Deutschmann <michael at talamasca dot wkpowerlink dot com>
At 17:50 27.09.99 , Andreas Jaeger wrote:
>Hi,
>
>Michael reported a problem with a broken ld.so in glibc 2.1.2. He
>finally nailed this down to LDFLAGS=-s in his environment. I can
>reproduce the problem with binutils 2.9.1.0.25 (he used 2.9.5.0.13).
>
>Is this a binutils bug or is there another reason not to use `-s' for
>linking?
Hmm, there were (are?) some mystery problems (corrupted binaries) with
strip and/or LDFLAGS=-s on Linux/PPC as well. That's why we still ship an
unstripped glibc. It tends to happen especially with large binaries, but we
never found why, cause nobody could reproduce it reliably. I _thought_ it
was fixed in binutils-2.9.[45].*, but I wasn't brave enough yet to try it
on the whole distribution...
Franz.