https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30930
--- Comment #7 from Nick Clifton <nickc at redhat dot com> --- (In reply to Julian Sikorski from comment #5) > (In reply to Nick Clifton from comment #4) > > You may find it useful to compare a broken-linked-with-ld.bfd binary > > with a working-linked-with-lld binary. In particular the contents > > of whatever init sections they have, and the ordering of function > > pointers therein. > > I am downloading the broken binary from the test system now. How can I do > the above? Well first you can compare the disassembly of the .init section to make sure that it is the same in both binaries: objdump -D -j .init mame Next I was going to suggest that you check the contents of the .init_array section but it appears to be all zeros, which is a bit strange. You could be paranoid and check that the hardware property notes are the same on both binaries: readelf -n -W mame | grep -e .note.gnu.property -A 4 But I doubt if that show any discrepancies. But I suspect that the only real way you are going to get some traction on this problem is if you bring in the glibc folks. Maybe file a bug report telling them that mame is hanging during initialization and that you need their help finding out where things have gone wrong ? Let them know about the new version of binutils of course, but do ask them if they can track down exactly what the linker has done wrong in order to cause the init code to hang. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.