[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Sun, 5 Feb 2017 18:40:47 -0500
From: Rich Felker <dalias@...c.org>
To: musl@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] use .object_arch to declare the architecture of
the object file
On Sat, Feb 04, 2017 at 03:19:47PM +0100, Reiner Herrmann wrote:
> musl fails to build for arm with current binutils (since commit bada434).
> Szabolcs Nagy suggested to use .object_arch for declaring the architecture
> of the object file, instead of .arch.
>
> See also: https://sourceware.org/ml/binutils/2006-09/msg00054.html
> ---
> src/thread/arm/atomics.s | 2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/src/thread/arm/atomics.s b/src/thread/arm/atomics.s
> index 202faa4a..101ad391 100644
> --- a/src/thread/arm/atomics.s
> +++ b/src/thread/arm/atomics.s
> @@ -84,7 +84,7 @@ __a_gettp_cp15:
> bx lr
>
> /* Tag this file with minimum ISA level so as not to affect linking. */
> -.arch armv4t
> +.object_arch armv4t
> .eabi_attribute 6,2
What's the earliest version of binutils that supports this? If it's a
newish feature we can't just unconditionally switch... (ARM is
infamous for that kind of breakage...) But if it's been around for a
really long time (long enough that older binutils versions are
seriously broken) it doesn't matter.
Rich
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use?
Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia
and check out these
guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.
