Date: Sat, 11 Jan 2014 16:04:25 -0600 From: Rob Landley <rob@...dley.net> To: musl@...ts.openwall.com Subject: Re: Re: libgcc --disable-shared test case On 01/11/14 15:51, Rich Felker wrote: > On Sat, Jan 11, 2014 at 11:40:32AM -0600, Rob Landley wrote: >> Looks like my toolchain doesn't exhibit this behavior? (Not after I >> hacked the hell out of the libgcc.a build, anyway...) > > What arch? i686. > I would expect this to show up on i386 but not x86_64, > since the latter has native division and libgcc functions won't be > needed. It could also be an issue of -O level if gcc decided to use > long division instead of bitshift to implement /16. It was -O2 because your email said -O2. Only thing that changed in the command line(s) was the compiler binary path/name. > Or it might be something completely different. > > If you could share the two versions of libfoo.so, a.out, and maybe > even libgcc.a, I can probably figure out what's going on. Tarball of the newly built stuff attached, the other stuff should be at http://landley.net/simple-root-filesystem-i686.tar.bz2 (which isn't the release version because I made sure this one _wasn't_ built from a stage 2 cross compiler. This is from an aboriginal build that didn't do a stage 2 cross compiler, but built everything with the "simple" cross compiler.) > Rich Rob Download attachment "test.tar.bz2" of type "application/x-bzip" (7051 bytes)
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.