Issues with ld: "bootstrap with --static" rearing its ugly head

Bill's LFS Login lfsbill at nospam.dot
Tue Nov 11 13:34:13 PST 2003


On Tue, 11 Nov 2003, Erik Postma wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> Working on LFS 5.0 from SuSE 7.0. I had the following issues:
>
> 1) In make check of glibc, something failed. Well, it didn't exactly fail,
><snip>

> I checked it on search.linuxfromscratch.org and found one guy with the
> same issue who had seemingly resolved it by disabling the test and
> continuing regardless. I did the same and found no other errors; so I
> decided I'd continue.[...]

> 2) During make check of binutils pass 2 in chap. 5, one test failed
> unexpectedly:
> <snip>

> After some backtracking, ld turned out to be
> the problem:
>
> # ldd /tools/bin/ld
>         libbfd-2.14.so => not found
>         libc.so.6 => /tools/lib/libc.so.6 (0x40017000)
>         /tools/lib/ld-linux.so.2 => /tools/lib/ld-linux.so.2 (0x40000000)
>
> Upon receiving this distress call, I again turned to
> search.linuxfromscratch.org asking for pages having to do with libbfd and
> approximately the fiftieth of those was a message in this thread:
>  http://archives.linuxfromscratch.org/
>  mail-archives/lfs-support/2003-October/020134.html
> (url wrapped again!)
> where in the end, a temporary fix is suggested having to do with nls by
> Greg (hi!). I am very open to poking around stuff to find a real solution.
>
> Currently thinking about how I could repair the current situation, seeing
> that I can't compile anything now. I'd have to do binutils pass 1, then
> gcc, lock it in, binutils pass 2 and on from there at the very least, I
> guess. But I am more seriously expecting instructions to start over...:(
>
> Thanks for any help!

Ouch! I sure hate to see you have to start over. What would the
toolchain folks think of having someone with the same versions of stuff
you have, and the same architecture, send you their libbfd? Since this
is the stuff in /tools, it should be relatively "pure" and *almost*
identical if it came from a platform that was the same (arch and
gcc/glibc/binutils-wise) and at the proper stage of building.

Damn, if RH can send binaries out, we ought to be able to do it too!  :P

Hope I'm not looking too foolish with this thought.

-- 
Bill Maltby
lfsbillATwlmcsDOTcom
Fix line above & use it to mail me direct.



More information about the lfs-support mailing list