From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.org/gmane.linux.lib.musl.general/6290 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: "writeonce@midipix.org" Newsgroups: gmane.linux.lib.musl.general Subject: Re: libgcc errors Date: Thu, 09 Oct 2014 18:04:15 -0400 Message-ID: <5437065F.8010702@midipix.org> References: <20141007195156.GV21835@port70.net> <5434704E.8080504@sholland.net> <54367BF6.80203@bradfordembedded.com> <263E3217-740D-44F2-BC2A-BDCA4AFB38B8@sholland.net> Reply-To: musl@lists.openwall.com NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1412892285 11657 80.91.229.3 (9 Oct 2014 22:04:45 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 9 Oct 2014 22:04:45 +0000 (UTC) To: musl@lists.openwall.com Original-X-From: musl-return-6303-gllmg-musl=m.gmane.org@lists.openwall.com Fri Oct 10 00:04:38 2014 Return-path: Envelope-to: gllmg-musl@plane.gmane.org Original-Received: from mother.openwall.net ([195.42.179.200]) by plane.gmane.org with smtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1XcLp8-0006i9-Et for gllmg-musl@plane.gmane.org; Fri, 10 Oct 2014 00:04:38 +0200 Original-Received: (qmail 20200 invoked by uid 550); 9 Oct 2014 22:04:37 -0000 Mailing-List: contact musl-help@lists.openwall.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: Original-Received: (qmail 20192 invoked from network); 9 Oct 2014 22:04:37 -0000 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.1.2 In-Reply-To: Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.linux.lib.musl.general:6290 Archived-At: On 10/09/2014 05:43 PM, Samuel Holland wrote: > On October 9, 2014 4:08:35 PM CDT, stephen Turner wrote: >> Thanks Samuel, >> I would use the musl-gcc wrapper (and have) however once gcc is compiled > >from it then it does not support dynamic linking due to the lack of --host >> (suggested) or --target (what seems more appropriate to me) specified in >> the configure flags. If i do specify it then i get all kinds of crazy >> errors These errors are partly the result of how gcc passes environment variables to the configure scripts and make recipes in its sub-directories. In cbb, such errors were the motivation for 1) not using musl-gcc directly, but rather passing -specs=$specs_file to the gcc configure script, and 2) using the $script_xgcc_for_specs environment variable, and applying the related patch to gcc's Makefile.in. >> which is why i consulted this mailing list in the first place since >> i have tried googling my way through documentation for a month prior to >> asking for help. > It took me an entire summer to figure this all out. +1 :) >> Its my inexperienced opinion that simply switching libs from glibc6 to musl >> should be relatively easy compared to the full cross compile. To me it >> seems like it would be as easy as specifying a new lib when rebuilding gcc >> and that would be all. > It would be that easy if everything was statically linked. > >> let me ask you one quick question. I went to the musl-cross website on >> bitbucket/gregorr and grabbed the patch for 4.7.3, is that a good working >> patch and gcc version? (all my errors seem to stem from compiling gcc) and >> is there any special way to download it or just click the raw button and >> wget the link then "patch -Np1 -i file.name.diff"? > That is the correct file, and there is no special way to download it. Those steps will work. Your problems are not caused by a bad patch, but pollution from your host libc and toolchain. Dynamic linking is hard to get rid of. (I'm trying to avoid a rant here...) > > If I might ask, what is your end goal? Maybe you'd have a better time starting with something like Alpine or Sabotage. >