Your message dated Sat, 14 Apr 2001 22:14:54 +0200 (MEST)
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line fixed with
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.
(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what I am
talking about this indicates a serious mail system misconfiguration
somewhere. Please contact me immediately.)
Darren Benham
(administrator, Debian Bugs database)
--------------------------------------
Received: (at submit) by bugs.debian.org; 26 Mar 2001 21:55:52 +0000
>From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Mon Mar 26 15:55:51 2001
Return-path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Received: from dillweed.dsl.xmission.com (winder.codepoet.org) [166.70.14.212]
by master.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.12 1 (Debian))
id 14hexr-0002jg-00; Mon, 26 Mar 2001 15:55:51 -0600
Received: by winder.codepoet.org (Postfix, from userid 1000)
id B5B65237227; Mon, 26 Mar 2001 14:55:50 -0700 (MST)
Date: Mon, 26 Mar 2001 14:55:50 -0700
From: Erik Andersen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: binutils will not build on arm
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i
X-Operating-System: Linux 2.2.17, Rebel-NetWinder(Intel sa110 rev 3), 262.14
BogoMips
X-No-Junk-Mail: I do not want to get *any* junk mail.
Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Package: binutils
Version: 2.11.90.0.1-1
Severity: normal
binutils doesn't compile on arm it seems...
[EMAIL PROTECTED] binutils-2.10.91.0.2]$ cat /proc/cpuinfo
Processor : Intel StrongARM-110 rev 3 (v4l)
BogoMIPS : 262.14
Hardware : Rebel-NetWinder
Revision : 44ff
Serial : 0000000000000639
[EMAIL PROTECTED] bfd]$ gcc -v
Reading specs from /usr/lib/gcc-lib/arm-linux/2.95.3/specs
gcc version 2.95.3 20010315 (Debian release)
[EMAIL PROTECTED] bfd]$ ld -v
GNU ld version 2.10.91 (with BFD 2.10.91.0.2)
[EMAIL PROTECTED] binutils-2.10.91.0.2]$ uname -a
Linux winder 2.2.17 #15 Fri Mar 16 22:51:41 MST 2001 armv4l unknown
Here is what I see:
gcc -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -I../../bfd -I. -D_GNU_SOURCE -I. -I../../bfd
-I../../bfd/../include -I../../bfd/../intl -I../intl -W -Wall -O2 -c
../../bfd/efi-app-ia64.c -fPIC -DPIC -o .libs/efi-app-ia64.o
gcc -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -I../../bfd -I. -D_GNU_SOURCE -I. -I../../bfd
-I../../bfd/../include -I../../bfd/../intl -I../intl -W -Wall -O2 -c
../../bfd/efi-app-ia64.c -o efi-app-ia64.o >/dev/null 2>&1
rm -f pepigen.c
sed -e s/XX/pep/g < ../../bfd/peXXigen.c > pepigen.new
mv -f pepigen.new pepigen.c
/bin/sh ./libtool --mode=compile gcc -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -I../../bfd -I.
-D_GNU_SOURCE -I. -I../../bfd -I../../bfd/../include
-I../../bfd/../intl -I../intl -W -Wall -O2 -c pepigen.c
gcc -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -I../../bfd -I. -D_GNU_SOURCE -I. -I../../bfd
-I../../bfd/../include -I../../bfd/../intl -I../intl -W -Wall -O2 -c pepigen.c
-fPIC -DPIC -o .libs/pepigen.o
gcc -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -I../../bfd -I. -D_GNU_SOURCE -I. -I../../bfd
-I../../bfd/../include -I../../bfd/../intl -I../intl -W -Wall -O2 -c pepigen.c
-o pepigen.o >/dev/null 2>&1
make[4]: *** [pepigen.lo] Error 1
make[4]: Leaving directory `/tmp/foo/binutils-2.11.90.0.1/builddir-multi/bfd'
make[3]: *** [all-recursive] Error 1
make[3]: Leaving directory `/tmp/foo/binutils-2.11.90.0.1/builddir-multi/bfd'
make[2]: *** [all-recursive-am] Error 2
make[2]: Leaving directory `/tmp/foo/binutils-2.11.90.0.1/builddir-multi/bfd'
make[1]: *** [all-bfd] Error 2
make[1]: Leaving directory `/tmp/foo/binutils-2.11.90.0.1/builddir-multi'
make: *** [build-multi-stamp] Error 2
Checking a bit more closely, this is what I see:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] binutils-2.11.90.0.1]$ cd
/tmp/foo/binutils-2.11.90.0.1/builddir-multi/bfd
[EMAIL PROTECTED] bfd]$ gcc -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -I../../bfd -I. -D_GNU_SOURCE
-I. -I../../bfd -I../../bfd/../include -I../../bfd/../intl -I../intl -W -Wall
-O2 -c pepigen.c -o pepigen.o
pepigen.c: In function `pe_print_pdata':
pepigen.c:1687: internal error--unrecognizable insn:
(insn 564 558 566 (set (reg:SI 176)
(mem/s:SI (plus:SI (reg/v:SI 36)
(subreg:SI (reg:DI 132) 0)) 0)) -1 (nil)
(nil))
I get exactly the same problem with binutils-2.10.91.0.2-4
gcc -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -I../../bfd -I. -D_GNU_SOURCE -I. -I../../bfd
-I../../bfd/../include -I../../bfd/../intl -I../intl -W -Wall -O2 -c
elf64-ia64.c -o elf64-ia64.o >/dev/null 2>&1
/bin/sh ./libtool --mode=compile gcc -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -I../../bfd -I.
-D_GNU_SOURCE -I. -I../../bfd -I../../bfd/../include
-I../../bfd/../intl -I../intl -W -Wall -O2 -c ../../bfd/efi-app-ia64.c
gcc -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -I../../bfd -I. -D_GNU_SOURCE -I. -I../../bfd
-I../../bfd/../include -I../../bfd/../intl -I../intl -W -Wall -O2 -c
../../bfd/efi-app-ia64.c -fPIC -DPIC -o .libs/efi-app-ia64.o
gcc -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -I../../bfd -I. -D_GNU_SOURCE -I. -I../../bfd
-I../../bfd/../include -I../../bfd/../intl -I../intl -W -Wall -O2 -c
../../bfd/efi-app-ia64.c -o efi-app-ia64.o >/dev/null 2>&1
rm -f pepigen.c
sed -e s/XX/pep/g < ../../bfd/peXXigen.c > pepigen.new
mv -f pepigen.new pepigen.c
/bin/sh ./libtool --mode=compile gcc -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -I../../bfd -I.
-D_GNU_SOURCE -I. -I../../bfd -I../../bfd/../include
-I../../bfd/../intl -I../intl -W -Wall -O2 -c pepigen.c
gcc -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -I../../bfd -I. -D_GNU_SOURCE -I. -I../../bfd
-I../../bfd/../include -I../../bfd/../intl -I../intl -W -Wall -O2 -c pepigen.c
-fPIC -DPIC -o .libs/pepigen.o
gcc -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -I../../bfd -I. -D_GNU_SOURCE -I. -I../../bfd
-I../../bfd/../include -I../../bfd/../intl -I../intl -W -Wall -O2 -c pepigen.c
-o pepigen.o >/dev/null 2>&1
make[4]: *** [pepigen.lo] Error 1
make[4]: Leaving directory `/tmp/foo/binutils-2.10.91.0.2/builddir-multi/bfd'
make[3]: *** [all-recursive] Error 1
make[3]: Leaving directory `/tmp/foo/binutils-2.10.91.0.2/builddir-multi/bfd'
make[2]: *** [all-recursive-am] Error 2
make[2]: Leaving directory `/tmp/foo/binutils-2.10.91.0.2/builddir-multi/bfd'
make[1]: *** [all-bfd] Error 2
make[1]: Leaving directory `/tmp/foo/binutils-2.10.91.0.2/builddir-multi'
make: *** [build-multi-stamp] Error 2
[EMAIL PROTECTED] binutils-2.10.91.0.2]$ cd
/tmp/foo/binutils-2.10.91.0.2/builddir-multi/bfd
[EMAIL PROTECTED] bfd]$ gcc -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -I../../bfd -I. -D_GNU_SOURCE
-I. -I../../bfd -I../../bfd/../include -I../../bfd/../intl -I../intl -W -Wall
-O2 -c pepigen.c -o pepigen.o
pepigen.c: In function `pe_print_pdata':
pepigen.c:1686: internal error--unrecognizable insn:
(insn 564 558 566 (set (reg:SI 176)
(mem/s:SI (plus:SI (reg/v:SI 36)
(subreg:SI (reg:DI 132) 0)) 0)) -1 (nil)
(nil))
-Erik
--
Erik B. Andersen email: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--This message was written using 73% post-consumer electrons--
---------------------------------------
Received: (at 91823-done) by bugs.debian.org; 14 Apr 2001 20:17:54 +0000
>From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sat Apr 14 15:17:54 2001
Return-path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Received: from mail.cs.tu-berlin.de [130.149.17.13] (root)
by master.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.12 1 (Debian))
id 14oWUT-0004Hi-00; Sat, 14 Apr 2001 15:17:54 -0500
Received: from bolero.cs.tu-berlin.de (bolero.cs.tu-berlin.de [130.149.19.1])
by mail.cs.tu-berlin.de (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id WAA13603
for <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Sat, 14 Apr 2001 22:15:25 +0200 (MET DST)
Received: (from [EMAIL PROTECTED])
by bolero.cs.tu-berlin.de (8.9.3+Sun/8.9.3) id WAA22667;
Sat, 14 Apr 2001 22:14:55 +0200 (MEST)
From: Matthias Klose <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Date: Sat, 14 Apr 2001 22:14:54 +0200 (MEST)
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: fixed with
X-Mailer: VM 6.43 under 20.4 "Emerald" XEmacs Lucid
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
fixed with gcc-2.95-2.95.4-0
