| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
seppukuh
n00b
Joined: 21 Feb 2006
Posts: 9
|
 Posted: Tue Oct 17, 2006 7:12 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
I tried glibc 2.5 from the overlay and binutils 2.50.05, but still got the error. After downgrading binutils it broke and I can't compile anymore. I will restore an backup tomorrow and see if using binutils 2.50.0.3/4 does not cause the prelink error. I'm afraid I still have no clue what the real reason for this behaviour is. :/
Chi,
Stefan |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
roderick
l33t
Joined: 11 Jul 2005
Posts: 908
Location: St. John's, NL CANADA
|
| Posted: Tue Oct 17, 2006 8:58 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I get these errors but with glibc 2.4-r4 (from overlay).
I found that re-emerging the packages, that the binaries belonged to, fixed the "monotonically increasing" errors.
I have binutils from overlay (2.17.50.0.5) using hashstyle=both.
_________________
If God were a pickle, I'd still say "no pickle on my burger".
http://roderick-greening.blogspot.com/ |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
seppukuh
n00b
Joined: 21 Feb 2006
Posts: 9
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 20, 2006 8:52 am Post subject: |
|
|
Re-emerging does not work for me, but I downgraded to binutils-2.17.50.0.4 (from portage) and still use glibc-2.5.90.20061010 from the overlay. The errror is gone for every program I emerged with that configuration.  I will mask binutils *.0.5 for now and start (another) emerge -e world.
Chi,
Stefan |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
seppukuh
n00b
Joined: 21 Feb 2006
Posts: 9
|
| Posted: Sun Oct 22, 2006 8:17 am Post subject: |
|
|
emerge -e world has finished some moments ago and the error is (almost) gone. There are just 5 programs left that throw "section file offsets not monotonically increasing" (and not thousands). Somehow I must have forgot them. *g*
Chi,
Stefan |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
neuron
Advocate
Joined: 28 May 2002
Posts: 2371
|
| Posted: Sat Oct 28, 2006 12:53 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| is it now possible to get hashstyle without the overlay at all? Using binutils 2.17.50.0.3 from portage and glibc 2.5 from portage? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gergan Penkov
Veteran
Joined: 17 Jul 2004
Posts: 1464
Location: das kleinste Kuhdorf Deutschlands :)
|
| Posted: Mon Oct 30, 2006 7:56 pm Post subject: |
|
|
well I use glibc-2.5 from nxsty overly and binutils-2.17.5.06 from portage (there is a bug in earlier versions), and I use the nxsty glibc, because the portage version still sets 2.6.9 for the kernel headers by default, but you could probably export sth more sane (NPTL_KERNEL_VERSION) and use the portage build
_________________
"I knew when an angel whispered into my ear,
You gotta get him away, yeah
Hey little bitch!
Be glad you finally walked away or you may have not lived another day."
Godsmack |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
pvangarde
n00b
Joined: 18 May 2005
Posts: 71
|
| Posted: Sun Jul 15, 2007 2:55 am Post subject: |
|
|
(This is the first time I'm using hashstyle)
I emerged binutils .16, and then glibc 2.5-r4.
LDFLAGS="Wl, --hash-style=both"
I get this error on ACCEPT_KEYWORDS="~x86" emerge prelink
checking for C compile default output... configure: error: C compiler cannot create executables
I get this error on emerge portage
cc1: error: unrecognized command line option "-fhash-style=both"
commenting out LDFLAGS emerges prelink. binutils error?
I have gcc 4.1.1-r3 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
nesl247
Veteran
Joined: 15 Jun 2004
Posts: 1614
Location: Florida
|
| Posted: Sun Jul 15, 2007 10:04 am Post subject: |
|
|
| pvangarde wrote: | (This is the first time I'm using hashstyle)
I emerged binutils .16, and then glibc 2.5-r4.
LDFLAGS="Wl, --hash-style=both"
I get this error on ACCEPT_KEYWORDS="~x86" emerge prelink
checking for C compile default output... configure: error: C compiler cannot create executables
I get this error on emerge portage
cc1: error: unrecognized command line option "-fhash-style=both"
commenting out LDFLAGS emerges prelink. binutils error?
I have gcc 4.1.1-r3 |
Could be because You have Wl instead of -Wl. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
pvangarde
n00b
Joined: 18 May 2005
Posts: 71
|
| Posted: Sun Jul 15, 2007 5:08 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| nesl247 wrote: | | pvangarde wrote: | (This is the first time I'm using hashstyle)
I emerged binutils .16, and then glibc 2.5-r4.
LDFLAGS="Wl, --hash-style=both"
I get this error on ACCEPT_KEYWORDS="~x86" emerge prelink
checking for C compile default output... configure: error: C compiler cannot create executables
I get this error on emerge portage
cc1: error: unrecognized command line option "-fhash-style=both"
commenting out LDFLAGS emerges prelink. binutils error?
I have gcc 4.1.1-r3 |
Could be because You have Wl instead of -Wl. |
No that was a typo as I was copying the ouput. I do have
LDFLAGS="-Wl, --hash-style=both"
This is really upsetting. I tried using gcc 3.4.6 and 4.1.2 with no luck. I also tried using binutils .12. The only thing I haven't tried is using lower/higher version of glibc. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
nesl247
Veteran
Joined: 15 Jun 2004
Posts: 1614
Location: Florida
|
| Posted: Sun Jul 15, 2007 6:09 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Remove the spaces after the commas, so LDFLAGS="-Wl,--hash-style=both" |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
pvangarde
n00b
Joined: 18 May 2005
Posts: 71
|
| Posted: Sun Jul 15, 2007 10:49 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| nesl247 wrote: | | Remove the spaces after the commas, so LDFLAGS="-Wl,--hash-style=both" |
I just spend a day trying to do this .. because of an extra space? Well, thank you. I feel retarded. What I didn't understand is why the heck I was getting an error from the core c compiler (cc1), and not from the linker (ld)? And why does it matter if I have an extra space or not? hmm.. Thanks again. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
roderick
l33t
Joined: 11 Jul 2005
Posts: 908
Location: St. John's, NL CANADA
|
| Posted: Tue Jul 17, 2007 2:32 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| pvangarde wrote: | | And why does it matter if I have an extra space or not? hmm.. Thanks again. |
The comma is not a separator here - hence, spaces are not permitted as the "Wl,--hash-style=both" is the entire and exact LD flag being enabled.
_________________
If God were a pickle, I'd still say "no pickle on my burger".
http://roderick-greening.blogspot.com/ |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Martigen
n00b
Joined: 04 Mar 2003
Posts: 59
|
| Posted: Fri Jul 20, 2007 7:10 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Is hashstyle necessary? Does it make much of a difference compared to merely pre-linking a standard Gentoo install? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gergan Penkov
Veteran
Joined: 17 Jul 2004
Posts: 1464
Location: das kleinste Kuhdorf Deutschlands :)
|
| Posted: Fri Jul 20, 2007 7:16 am Post subject: |
|
|
No, as it is now on by default on Gentoo.
_________________
"I knew when an angel whispered into my ear,
You gotta get him away, yeah
Hey little bitch!
Be glad you finally walked away or you may have not lived another day."
Godsmack |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
pussi
l33t
Joined: 08 May 2004
Posts: 727
Location: Finland
|
| Posted: Fri Jul 20, 2007 7:29 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Gergan Penkov wrote: | | No, as it is now on by default on Gentoo. |
since when?
Sounds a little odd to me if it isn't even available in any stable binutils versions yet. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
gimpel
Advocate
Joined: 15 Oct 2004
Posts: 2720
Location: Munich, Bavaria
|
| Posted: Fri Jul 20, 2007 8:01 am Post subject: |
|
|
| pussi wrote: | | Gergan Penkov wrote: | | No, as it is now on by default on Gentoo. |
since when?
Sounds a little odd to me if it isn't even available in any stable binutils versions yet. |
Indeed.
And why do you all use --hash-style=both? For binutils and glibc LDFLAGS are reset to sane defaults. So your LDFLAGS settings are ignored anyway.
My system is completely compiled with -Wl,--hash-style=gnu - though core toolchain uses old hash by default
| Code: | tom@SiRiUS ~ $ readelf -a /usr/i686-pc-linux-gnu/binutils-bin/2.17.50.0.10/readelf|grep HASH
[ 6] .hash HASH 08048188 001188 0001a4 04 A 7 0 4
0x00000004 (HASH) 0x8048188
tom@SiRiUS ~ $ readelf -a /usr/bin/audacious|grep HASH
[ 3] .gnu.hash GNU_HASH 08048188 000188 002408 04 A 4 0 4
0x6ffffef5 (GNU_HASH) 0x8048188
|
And as .gnu.hash is preferred over .hash when available, I see no point in using =both
_________________
http://proaudio.tuxfamily.org/wiki - pro-audio software overlay
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Martigen
n00b
Joined: 04 Mar 2003
Posts: 59
|
| Posted: Fri Jul 20, 2007 8:16 am Post subject: |
|
|
| gimpel wrote: |
And as .gnu.hash is preferred over .hash when available, I see no point in using =both |
What does using =both do if it is specified?
And since this info has changed a lot since this thread first started, if one wanted to recompile their system with hashstyle, and given what you said about above using 'gnu' instead of 'both', what's the short summary of steps to take to do this? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gergan Penkov
Veteran
Joined: 17 Jul 2004
Posts: 1464
Location: das kleinste Kuhdorf Deutschlands :)
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
pussi
l33t
Joined: 08 May 2004
Posts: 727
Location: Finland
|
| Posted: Fri Jul 20, 2007 6:13 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| aah I've always wondered how gentoo enables these some ldflags by default. Thanks for clearing that out. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
gimpel
Advocate
Joined: 15 Oct 2004
Posts: 2720
Location: Munich, Bavaria
|
| Posted: Fri Jul 20, 2007 8:27 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Martigen wrote: | | gimpel wrote: |
And as .gnu.hash is preferred over .hash when available, I see no point in using =both |
What does using =both do if it is specified? |
The effect is minimal, but it bloats your binaries a bit.
| Quote: | | And since this info has changed a lot since this thread first started, if one wanted to recompile their system with hashstyle, and given what you said about above using 'gnu' instead of 'both', what's the short summary of steps to take to do this? |
Change LDFLAGS and 'emerge -e world'.
I guess you can even change it, and just let time and world updates pass by. If you use =both, then DT_GNU_HASH is preferred when loading anyway. So basically you do not have to recompile the whole system just because you are switching from both hashstyles to gnu only.
_________________
http://proaudio.tuxfamily.org/wiki - pro-audio software overlay
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
gimpel
Advocate
Joined: 15 Oct 2004
Posts: 2720
Location: Munich, Bavaria
|
| Posted: Fri Jul 20, 2007 8:32 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| pussi wrote: | | aah I've always wondered how gentoo enables these some ldflags by default. Thanks for clearing that out. |
Strange, so both is enabled looking at that patch, but readelf binary being part of binutils itself only has old hash? Wicked..
(Maybe i hapened to install binutils 2.17.50.0.10 before that was added? .. around january something)
_________________
http://proaudio.tuxfamily.org/wiki - pro-audio software overlay
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
pussi
l33t
Joined: 08 May 2004
Posts: 727
Location: Finland
|
| Posted: Fri Jul 20, 2007 8:42 pm Post subject: |
|
|
at least binutils-bin-2.17.50.0.17 on my system has GNU_HASH | Code: | $ readelf -a /usr/i686-pc-linux-gnu/binutils-bin/2.17.50.0.17/readelf|grep HASH
[ 3] .gnu.hash GNU_HASH 080481a8 0001a8 000078 04 A 4 0 4
0x6ffffef5 (GNU_HASH) 0x80481a8 |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
gimpel
Advocate
Joined: 15 Oct 2004
Posts: 2720
Location: Munich, Bavaria
|
| Posted: Fri Jul 20, 2007 9:47 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| pussi wrote: | at least binutils-bin-2.17.50.0.17 on my system has GNU_HASH | Code: | $ readelf -a /usr/i686-pc-linux-gnu/binutils-bin/2.17.50.0.17/readelf|grep HASH
[ 3] .gnu.hash GNU_HASH 080481a8 0001a8 000078 04 A 4 0 4
0x6ffffef5 (GNU_HASH) 0x80481a8 |
|
Very interesting. I am going to prepare a binutils upgrade
Shouldn't gcc-4.2 go ~arch too next days, that would be one wash up then..
_________________
http://proaudio.tuxfamily.org/wiki - pro-audio software overlay
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gergan Penkov
Veteran
Joined: 17 Jul 2004
Posts: 1464
Location: das kleinste Kuhdorf Deutschlands :)
|
| Posted: Fri Jul 20, 2007 10:26 pm Post subject: |
|
|
It is already unstable at least on amd64, it has been pushed probably today.
_________________
"I knew when an angel whispered into my ear,
You gotta get him away, yeah
Hey little bitch!
Be glad you finally walked away or you may have not lived another day."
Godsmack
Last edited by Gergan Penkov on Sat Jul 21, 2007 9:17 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Martigen
n00b
Joined: 04 Mar 2003
Posts: 59
|
| Posted: Sat Jul 21, 2007 5:42 am Post subject: |
|
|
| gimpel wrote: |
| Quote: | | And since this info has changed a lot since this thread first started, if one wanted to recompile their system with hashstyle, and given what you said about above using 'gnu' instead of 'both', what's the short summary of steps to take to do this? |
Change LDFLAGS and 'emerge -e world'.
I guess you can even change it, and just let time and world updates pass by. If you use =both, then DT_GNU_HASH is preferred when loading anyway. So basically you do not have to recompile the whole system just because you are switching from both hashstyles to gnu only. |
Ok thanks. Last question: does prelink work with or against it? Do we even need prelink anymore with DT_GNU_HASH? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
Unsupported Software
