From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Message-Id: <4.1.19990223155132.049de8f0@mail.lauterbach.com> Date: Tue, 23 Feb 1999 16:00:01 +0100 To: Tom Vier From: Franz Sirl Subject: Re: egcs-1.1.1-1c bug (was Re: major ksyms problem) Cc: Tom Vier , mklinux-development-system@public.lists.apple.com, mklinux-setup@public.lists.apple.com, linuxppc-dev@lists.linuxppc.org In-Reply-To: References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: owner-linuxppc-dev@lists.linuxppc.org List-Id: At 15:36 22.02.99 , Tom Vier wrote: > >it's an egcs bug. i think it's not aligning instructions properly, cuz >i believe the 601 is more strict about alignment. is anyone having >problems using bsd_comp.o, ppp_deflate.o, and hfs.o on a non-601 >machine built under pre-R5 (egcs-1.1.1-1c)? What makes you think that it is an egcs bug? I have no problems on 601 (7200/75) with any of the modules you listed. Are you sure you have the latest modutils (2.1.121 or later) installed? >i rebuilt bsd_comp.o and ppp_deflate.o w/ egcs-1.0-2e from dr3 and >they worked perfectly. > >egcs-1.1.1-1c failed using -O0, -O2, and -O3 with all combinations of >-mcpu=601, -mcpu=604, and -fno-schedule-insns. -fpic did work, however >it addes an offset table symbol that makes insmod complain. > >is this a know problem? > >> > Feb 21 09:36:18 zero insmod: /lib/modules/2.0.37-osfmach3/net/bsd_comp.o: >> > Unhandled relocation of type 26 for .L343 Is "Unhandled relocation of type 26" the behaviour for standard compilation or for -fpic? You can't compile a kernel/modules with -fpic and expect modutils still to work, modutils only handles the minimum necessary relocation types. Franz. [[ This message was sent via the linuxppc-dev mailing list. Replies are ]] [[ not forced back to the list, so be sure to Cc linuxppc-dev if your ]] [[ reply is of general interest. To unsubscribe from linuxppc-dev, send ]] [[ the message 'unsubscribe' to linuxppc-dev-request@lists.linuxppc.org ]]