Date: Fri, 11 May 2018 17:59:01 +0200 From: Thomas Petazzoni <thomas.petazzoni@...tlin.com> To: Szabolcs Nagy <nsz@...t70.net> Cc: musl@...ts.openwall.com, Rich Felker <dalias@...c.org> Subject: Re: undefined reference to `raise' with musl static toolchain Hello, Thanks for your feedback. On Wed, 9 May 2018 17:24:37 +0200, Szabolcs Nagy wrote: > there can be many reasons.. > > e.g. if mktime in uclibc-ng happens to reference raise then it > would get linked in independently of libgcc. In the static binary linked against uClibc, there are two references to __GI_raise: __GI_abort __aeabi_idiv0 __GI_abort is reference from _start, so I guess this means that __GI_abort is always pulled in, therefore __GI_raise is always pulled in, and __aeabi_idiv0 is happy. Now my question remains: do you consider it normal that -static is required, or do you consider it a bug of the musl/gcc integration that -static is required even when the only variant available of the library is the static one ? Thanks, Thomas -- Thomas Petazzoni, CTO, Bootlin (formerly Free Electrons) Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering https://bootlin.com
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.