Hi Alan, Thanks for the fast feedback.
On Aug 22, 2013, at 10:48 PM, Alan Modra <amo...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Thu, Aug 22, 2013 at 09:34:10PM +0700, Gary V. Vaughan wrote: >>> How can it be correct to say "-m elf32lppclinux" (32-bit) when $host is >>> explicitly 64-bit? That seems like utter garbage to me. What am I >>> missing this time? > > As far as I understand, this piece of libtool is supplying ld options > when your host compiler defaults to something other than what $host > implies. Which sounds very strange, but consider that on a > powerpc64-linux host your gcc will usually compile to both 32-bit and > 64-bit objects. Both 32-bit and 64-bit objects will run on the host, > and whether gcc produces 32-bit by default (most common a few years > ago) or 64-bit (most common now), depends on how gcc was configured. > > So if $host is powerpc64-linux and $CC is gcc and gcc produces 64-bit > by default, and $LD is powerpc64-linux-ld then no ld options are > needed. When generating 32-bit libraries on this system, $host is > powerpc-linux, $CC is still gcc, and $LD may be powerpc-linux-ld. > That's a problem because $CC with no options produces 64-bit objects > but $LD with no options is expecting 32-bit. > > This is all somewhat of a guess on my part, but I've seen these $LD > and $CC selections. Most configure scripts seem to prefer > "powerpc64-linux-ld" over plain "ld" when $host is powerpc64-linux, > and similarly "powerpc-linux-ld" for $host of powerpc-linux. > >> I don't get it either, and I can't test it. Thanks for the explanation, I finally do get it. Phew :) >> I trust the ppcle community >> will commence shouting if the patches have done something horrible. > > It's broken. Please apply exactly the tested patch I submitted, or if > powerpc-* and similar in the switch statement is somehow the wrong > style (we've tested for powerpc*-*linux* already!), then make them > powerpc-*linux*. Not powerpc*-*linux*, which is exactly the same > mistake I made with my first patch.. I believe I already fixed it with the most recent amendment committed under your name (exactly by removing the errant * from the case branch matches). Please pull the most recent revision and let me know if I still didn't fix everything I broke recently. Cheers, -- Gary V. Vaughan (gary AT gnu DOT org)
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
