Current-Users archive

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Old Index]

Re: evbcf (coldfire) build is broken

On 9 Oct, 2013, at 04:23 , Martin Husemann <> wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 08, 2013 at 04:21:16PM -0400, Dennis Ferguson wrote:
>> While looking for something to compile a tree with some m68k bits
>> added I found that a successful build of evbcf needs the changes
>> below.  The problems seem related to the binutils changes.
> Can you please provide a bit more details? I'm a bit puzzled how
> -fommit-frame-pointer would interfere with new binutils (and if it
> does, isn't that a gcc bug we should fix instead)?

That's fair, but I'm not sure I can answer that with any authority.  My
correction only causes coldfire machines to be treated like other m68k
machines were already being treated, and I'm pretty sure this part is

I did notice that removal of -fomit-frame-pointer for those architectures
was a recent change, however, and the build errors for evbcf looked like

#   compile  ld.elf_so/mdreloc.o
/build/evbcf/obj/tooldir.NetBSD-6.99.24-amd64/bin/m5407--netbsdelf-gcc -O1 
-fvisibility=hidden -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer -fstack-protector 
-Wstack-protector   --param ssp-buffer-size=1  -msoft-float -std=gnu99  -Wall 
-Wstrict-prototypes -Wmissing-prototypes -Wpointer-arith -Wno-sign-compare  
-Wno-traditional  -Wa,--fatal-warnings -Wreturn-type -Wswitch -Wshadow 
-Wcast-qual -Wwrite-strings -Wextra -Wno-unused-parameter -Wno-sign-compare 
-Wsign-compare -Wformat=2   -Wno-format-zero-length  -Wno-uninitialized -Werror 
   --sysroot=/build/evbcf/obj/destdir.evbcf -fpic -DELFSIZE=32 
-DLIBDIR=\"/usr/lib\" -D_PATH_RTLD=\"/libexec/ld.elf_so\" 
-I/usr/src/libexec/ld.elf_so -I. -DRTLD_LOADER -D_RTLD_SOURCE -DCOMBRELOC  
-D_FORTIFY_SOURCE=2 -c    /usr/src/libexec/ld.elf_so/arch/m68k/mdreloc.c
cc1: warnings being treated as errors
/usr/src/libexec/ld.elf_so/arch/m68k/mdreloc.c:1:0: error: unwind tables 
currently require a frame pointer for correctness
*** [mdreloc.o] Error code 1

so it seems like something is now issuing a warning when it would previously
just let you do something which was unreliable.

Dennis Ferguson

Home | Main Index | Thread Index | Old Index