From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.org/gmane.linux.lib.musl.general/12821 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Thomas Petazzoni Newsgroups: gmane.linux.lib.musl.general Subject: Re: undefined reference to `raise' with musl static toolchain Date: Fri, 11 May 2018 17:59:01 +0200 Organization: Bootlin (formerly Free Electrons) Message-ID: <20180511175901.7f17085a@windsurf.home> References: <20180508144417.216cefa5@windsurf.home> <20180508162226.GA30163@voyager> <20180508163423.GM1392@brightrain.aerifal.cx> <20180509112932.1a3176b0@windsurf.home> <20180509154407.1164eb41@windsurf.home> <20180509152437.GY4418@port70.net> Reply-To: musl@lists.openwall.com NNTP-Posting-Host: blaine.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: blaine.gmane.org 1526054243 21367 195.159.176.226 (11 May 2018 15:57:23 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 11 May 2018 15:57:23 +0000 (UTC) Cc: musl@lists.openwall.com, Rich Felker To: Szabolcs Nagy Original-X-From: musl-return-12837-gllmg-musl=m.gmane.org@lists.openwall.com Fri May 11 17:57:19 2018 Return-path: Envelope-to: gllmg-musl@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from mother.openwall.net ([195.42.179.200]) by blaine.gmane.org with smtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1fHAQ3-0005Se-B8 for gllmg-musl@m.gmane.org; Fri, 11 May 2018 17:57:19 +0200 Original-Received: (qmail 11897 invoked by uid 550); 11 May 2018 15:59:25 -0000 Mailing-List: contact musl-help@lists.openwall.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-ID: Original-Received: (qmail 11874 invoked from network); 11 May 2018 15:59:24 -0000 In-Reply-To: <20180509152437.GY4418@port70.net> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.15.1-dirty (GTK+ 2.24.32; x86_64-redhat-linux-gnu) Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.linux.lib.musl.general:12821 Archived-At: Hello, Thanks for your feedback. On Wed, 9 May 2018 17:24:37 +0200, Szabolcs Nagy wrote: > there can be many reasons.. > > e.g. if mktime in uclibc-ng happens to reference raise then it > would get linked in independently of libgcc. In the static binary linked against uClibc, there are two references to __GI_raise: __GI_abort __aeabi_idiv0 __GI_abort is reference from _start, so I guess this means that __GI_abort is always pulled in, therefore __GI_raise is always pulled in, and __aeabi_idiv0 is happy. Now my question remains: do you consider it normal that -static is required, or do you consider it a bug of the musl/gcc integration that -static is required even when the only variant available of the library is the static one ? Thanks, Thomas -- Thomas Petazzoni, CTO, Bootlin (formerly Free Electrons) Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering https://bootlin.com