Dan, thanks for weighing in. people at work are suggesting that this kind of problem shows that ppc isn't stable enough for real work but i want to show them it's not *representative* -- it's *anomalous* :)
On Wed, 25 Jul 2001, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote: > On Wed, Jul 25, 2001 at 10:02:37PM -0600, Bradley C. Midgley wrote: > > it seems that -fPIC doesn't suppress REL24 type relocations: > > First, I'm not sure it's supposed to is there another way i can tell the compiler that 24-bit relocations are likely to be out of range? i thought -fPIC did that but if it doesn't fit this purpose, please let me know. >, but more importantly, R_PPC_REL32 > and R_PPC_PLTREL24 are not R_PPC_REL24 relocations. i have to admit i don't know the difference. i only noticed that .o files didn't have any R_PPC_REL24 relocations but the .so generated from them doesn't have any R_PPC_PLTREL24 so i figured they were the same thing in different forms: [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~/cockpit/build/linuxgcc/scripting$ readelf -r PerlWrapper.o | grep getenv 00000128 07612 R_PPC_PLTREL24 00000000 getenv + 0 [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~/cockpit/build/linuxgcc/scripting$ readelf -r ../modules/libscripting-1-0.so | grep getenv 000177b0 0850a R_PPC_REL24 00000000 getenv + 0 0003b57c 08515 R_PPC_JMP_SLOT 00000000 getenv + 0 -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] Brad Midgley
