| 1 |
On 05-05-2008 08:40:41 +0200, Duft Markus wrote: |
| 2 |
> No, it's not ELF :) it's PE, just like any other binary on windows. |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
Ok. |
| 5 |
|
| 6 |
> > So, for those experts of you, wasn't it a good thing to install |
| 7 |
> > binutils? Is there something missing? What is the reason ld and as |
| 8 |
> > aren't compiled? |
| 9 |
> |
| 10 |
> The "PE" ist the reason for not building as and ld. It simply doesn't work right now (because whats called PE from binutils POV is mingw/cygwin). Microsoft has binutils 2.17 patched for interix in interix 6.0 (with sources/patches available), but the patch is absolutely unportable to 2.18 *arg...*, and in some places looks really hack-ish... still, maybe using binutils 2.17 would be an option... |
| 11 |
|
| 12 |
I guess it certainly is, since I'm on Win2K with Interix 3.5, and I've |
| 13 |
seen some assertions going off a few times in the linker. |
| 14 |
|
| 15 |
But, your modifications to binutils made me believe that binutils should |
| 16 |
be installed, otherwise I would've expected it to be masked, and the |
| 17 |
system packages set to use native-cctools instead... ? |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
> Maybe you want to have a look at http://prefix-launcher.svn.sourceforge.net/viewvc/prefix-launcher/eprefix-bootstrap/trunk/eprefix-bootstrap?view=markup. There i fixed all those issues you stumbled upon that don't belong in the tree (where the rest is ;)), and i think it's quite readable (also the binutils problem is fixed, though a little hackish too :)) |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
I don't see any "fix" there for sys-devel/binutils, so how do I get it |
| 22 |
to be compiled properly? |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
-- |
| 26 |
Fabian Groffen |
| 27 |
Gentoo on a different level |
| 28 |
-- |
| 29 |
gentoo-alt@l.g.o mailing list |
Archives