Date: Sat, 13 Apr 2013 13:41:50 +0700 From: Alexey Dokuchaev <danfe@nsu.ru> To: Dimitry Andric <dim@FreeBSD.org> Cc: stable@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: fusefs-kmod does not work on 8-STABLE? Message-ID: <20130413064150.GA72951@regency.nsu.ru> In-Reply-To: <E8564AE3-2D7F-495D-8E00-6D0EAAC5FB13@FreeBSD.org> References: <20130410052710.GA36137@regency.nsu.ru> <20130412101746.GA68687@regency.nsu.ru> <20130412142802.GA1657@regency.nsu.ru> <E8564AE3-2D7F-495D-8E00-6D0EAAC5FB13@FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Fri, Apr 12, 2013 at 07:12:39PM +0200, Dimitry Andric wrote:
> > Does anyone have a clue why new ld(1) plays so badly with our system
> > toolchain on 8.x (at least)?
>
> Maybe because there is almost 10 years difference between those
> implementations? :-)
>
> In any case, to figure out what is different, just try linking the
> kernel module with the system ld and the ports ld, and comparing
> "readelf -a" output.
Good idea. I've uploaded both outputs if someone wants to take a look.
Not surprisingly, "bad" output is shorter: readelf(1) reported only 16
section headers vs. "good" 18 (missing .got, .gnu_debuglink, and empty
.bss, yet having .eh_frame instead). Haven't look more closely yet:
http://193.124.210.26/readelf.bad
http://193.124.210.26/readelf.good
> Or upload both module versions somewhere, so we can all have a look.
Sure, at the same URL, hello{.c,_bad.ko,_good.ko}. Although it should be
pretty easy to reproduce locally: just install fresh devel/binutils, put
$localbase/bin in front of your $path, and rebuild hello.ko (or any your
favorite module).
./danfe
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20130413064150.GA72951>