_dl_app_init_array and _dl_app_fini_array problems

Kevin Day thekevinday at gmail.com
Fri Oct 6 13:39:19 UTC 2006


On 10/6/06, Rogelio Serrano <rogelio.serrano at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 10/1/06, Kevin Day <thekevinday at gmail.com> wrote:
> > On 9/29/06, Mike Frysinger <vapier at gentoo.org> wrote:
> > > On Thursday 28 September 2006 17:41, Kevin Day wrote:
> > > > 1)  libc.so is not a file, but the following:
> > >
> > > as it should be
> > btw, the word "file", I left out the word ELF. ( I had meant to say
> > that it was not an ELF file)
> >
> > Why is it set as this?  it is causing my toolchain to improperly link
> > to the host libc instead of the toolchain that I am trying to build.
> > Thus, polluting my entire toolchain.
> >
>
> you botched your binutils build. you need to start from scratch again.
>
> > >
> > > > 2)    _dl_app_init_array and _dl_app_fini_array were not found when
> > > > trying to link anything against libc.so.  with readelf, I found that
> > > > those two had the UND tags.
> > >
> > > again, by design
> > >
> > > the ldso defines those two symbols so your libc.so should be linking against
> > > the ldso so the symbols are found
> > > -mike
> > >
> > Thats the problem, it is not linking to ldso, and I am not sure where
> > in the make-system this is supposed to happen.
> >
> > So what is it that I am misunderstanding?
> >
>
> you missed a few critical steps.
>
> i always hit this problem when i forget to adjust the gcc spec file
> for example.
Here's the thing, gcc-4.1.1 does not supply a specfile for me.  This
stuff seems to be hardcoded now.

the print-specs command returns:
libc.a
And looking into the */lib/gcc/$target/$version/ directory, there is
no specfile present

So, perhaps I'll have to hardcode the specs at compile time to fix this.

(On uClibc, I got around this through a bootstrap until all of my
utilities were linked agains the target path. (which means that during
the middle of this process they would be linked randomly to both
target and host until the recompilations after that cleaned those
links out...and this method doesn't work from a uClibc 0.9.28 to a
uClibc 0.9.29 as this problem seems to show)

>
> > P.S. Sorry, didn't realize gmail was not replying to the list as I expected.
This constantly happened to me.

-- 
Kevin Day



More information about the uClibc mailing list