From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Date: Tue, 23 Feb 1999 07:24:39 -0500 (EST) From: Tom Vier Reply-To: Tom Vier To: Gary Thomas cc: linuxppc-dev@lists.linuxppc.org, mklinux-development-system@public.lists.apple.com Subject: RE: egcs-1.1.1-1c bug (was Re: major ksyms problem) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-linuxppc-dev@lists.linuxppc.org List-Id: On Tue, 23 Feb 1999, Gary Thomas wrote: > On 22-Feb-99 Tom Vier wrote: > > it's an egcs bug. i think it's not aligning instructions properly, cuz > > i believe the 601 is more strict about alignment. is anyone having > > problems using bsd_comp.o, ppp_deflate.o, and hfs.o on a non-601 > > machine built under pre-R5 (egcs-1.1.1-1c)? > > egcs-1.1.1-1c failed using -O0, -O2, and -O3 with all combinations of > > -mcpu=601, -mcpu=604, and -fno-schedule-insns. -fpic did work, however > > it addes an offset table symbol that makes insmod complain. > > > > is this a know problem? > I think you need newer binutils to fix this. Try using: > ftp://ftp.linuxppc.org/linuxppc/users/gdt/redhat/RPMS/ppc/binutils-2.9.1-19a.ppc.rpm no, it's an egcs bug, i believe. i'm already running binutils-2.9.1.0.19a-1a from the current pre-R5. i'm download those egcs rpms from your dir, right now, which fred bacon told me have VTABLE_THUNKS disabled. -- Tom Vier - 0x82B007A8 thomass@erols.com | goto the Zero Page at: Tortured Souls Software | http://www.erols.com/thomassr/zero/ [[ This message was sent via the linuxppc-dev mailing list. Replies are ]] [[ not forced back to the list, so be sure to Cc linuxppc-dev if your ]] [[ reply is of general interest. To unsubscribe from linuxppc-dev, send ]] [[ the message 'unsubscribe' to linuxppc-dev-request@lists.linuxppc.org ]]