On Mon, 2024-05-06 at 11:38:30 +0100, Slurm users wrote: > Hello, > > I instructed port to use binutils from ports (version 2.40 native) instead > of base: > > `/usr/local/bin/ld: unrecognised emulation mode: elf_aarch64` > > ``` > /usr/local/bin/ld -V |grep aarch64 > aarch64cloudabi > aarch64cloudabib > aarch64elf > aarch64elf32 > aarch64elf32b > aarch64elfb > aarch64fbsd > aarch64fbsdb > aarch64haiku > aarch64linux > aarch64linux32 > aarch64linux32b > aarch64linuxb > aarch64pe > ``` > > Any clues about "elf_aarch64" and "aarch64elf" mismatch?
This looks (I admit, I haven't UTSL) like the emulation mode is constructed from an "elf_" prefix and the architecture nickname - this works for "x86_64" and "i386" since the "ld" for the Intel/AMD architectures indeed provides the emulations "elf_x86_64" and "elf_i386" while for 64-bit ARM "elf" is used as a suffix. So this is mainly an ld inconsistency, I'm afraid (which might be fixed by adding alias names - but the hopes are pretty low). Non-emulated builds shouldn't be affected by the issue you found, right? (There is Slurm built for ARM64 Debian. Maybe they have patched the source?) Two ways to get this fixed I can imagine: (a) find the place where the emulation mode name is combined, and teach that of possible exceptions to the implemented rule (there may be more than just ARM - what about RISC-V, PPC64*, ...?) (b) interrupt the build in a reasonable place, find all occurreences of the wrong emulation string, and replace it with its existing counterpart There should be no doubt which one I'd prefer - I'll go and read TS ;) Cheers, Steffen -- Steffen Grunewald, Cluster Administrator Max Planck Institute for Gravitational Physics (Albert Einstein Institute) Am Mühlenberg 1 * D-14476 Potsdam-Golm * Germany ~~~ Fon: +49-331-567 7274 Mail: steffen.grunewald(at)aei.mpg.de ~~~ -- slurm-users mailing list -- slurm-users@lists.schedmd.com To unsubscribe send an email to slurm-users-le...@lists.schedmd.com
