Re: [Tinycc-devel] When is planned to be released the next version of Tcc?

[Barath Aron]

Oh, I missed that, sorry.

conftest returns "arm-linux-gnueabihf" as expected, but the test in the 
next line (configure:323):
  if test -n "$tt" -a -f "/usr/lib/$tt/crti.o" ; then
is not true, because I do not have a directory such 
/usr/lib/arm-linux-gnueabihf

[OFF]
It is funny though, conftest converts __ARM_EABI__ and __ARM_PCS_VFP 
into a misty "gnueabihf", and then configure tries to decode this stuff 
into TCC_CONFIG_ARM and TCC_ARM_EABI based on a mysterious assumption 
("/usr/lib/$tt/crti.o"). Sidenote: this triplet thing is the most 
shittiest thing in autotools (I know, tcc does not use autotools). 
That's why I prefer scconfig (http://repo.hu/projects/scconfig/) for my 
projects.
[ON]

Aron


On 12/23/18 3:07 PM, Christian Jullien wrote:
> As said, it's a temporary tool deleted by ./configure right after it's use.
>
> rm -f $TMPN* $CONFTEST
>
> Can you trace configure script to see how it uses $CONFTEST in different places 
> and why configure.mak is not correct?
>
> C.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Tinycc-devel [mailto:address@hidden On Behalf Of Barath Aron
> Sent: dimanche 23 décembre 2018 15:02
> To: address@hidden
> Subject: Re: [Tinycc-devel] When is planned to be released the next version of 
> Tcc?
>
> I just ran:
> $ gcc conftest.c -o conftest && ./conftest triplet
> arm-linux-gnueabihf
>
> Although, it is strange, I do not have this executable after running
> configure. Maybe configure decided to not use it?
>
>
> On 12/23/18 2:43 PM, Christian Jullien wrote:
> > Triplet is given by the temporary conftest tool. You can make it with:
> >
> > $ gcc conftest.c -o conftest && ./conftest triplet
> > arm-linux-gnueabihf
> >
> > Try to debug this very small C program to see why triplet is not  defined on 
> > your system.
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Tinycc-devel [mailto:address@hidden On Behalf Of Barath Aron
> > Sent: dimanche 23 décembre 2018 14:32
> > To: address@hidden
> > Subject: Re: [Tinycc-devel] When is planned to be released the next version of 
> > Tcc?
> >
> > What is in your triplet? Mine is empty.
> >
> > On 12/23/18 2:22 PM, Christian Jullien wrote:
> > > On Raspbian, running ./configure I get:
> > >
> > > address@hidden:~/tinycc $ more config.mak
> > > # Automatically generated by configure - do not modify
> > > prefix=/usr/local
> > > bindir=$(DESTDIR)/usr/local/bin
> > > tccdir=$(DESTDIR)/usr/local/lib/tcc
> > > libdir=$(DESTDIR)/usr/local/lib
> > > includedir=$(DESTDIR)/usr/local/include
> > > mandir=$(DESTDIR)/usr/local/share/man
> > > infodir=$(DESTDIR)/usr/local/share/info
> > > docdir=$(DESTDIR)/usr/local/share/doc
> > > CC=gcc
> > > GCC_MAJOR=6
> > > GCC_MINOR=3
> > > AR=ar
> > > STRIP=strip -s -R .comment -R .note
> > > CFLAGS=-Wall -g -O2 -Wdeclaration-after-statement -fno-strict-aliasing 
> > > -Wno-pointer-sign -Wno-sign-compare -Wno-unused-result
> > > LDFLAGS=
> > > LIBSUF=.a
> > > EXESUF=
> > > DLLSUF=.so
> > > NATIVE_DEFINES+=-DCONFIG_TRIPLET="\"arm-linux-gnueabihf\""
> > > NATIVE_DEFINES+=-DTCC_CPU_VERSION=7
> > > ARCH=arm
> > > TARGETOS=Linux
> > > CONFIG_arm_eabihf=yes
> > > CONFIG_arm_vfp=yes
> > > CONFIG_arm_vfp=yes
> > > VERSION = 0.9.27
> > > TOPSRC=$(TOP)
> > >
> > > This generated file is used by Makefile
> > > Line 11: include $(TOP)/config.mak
> > >
> > > Then
> > > Line 77: NATIVE_DEFINES_$(CONFIG_arm_eabihf) += -DTCC_ARM_EABI 
> > > -DTCC_ARM_HARDFLOAT
> > >
> > > IMHO, ./configure does something odd around line 336 with
> > >
> > >          if test "$cpu" = "arm" ; then
> > >            if test "${triplet%eabihf}" != "$triplet" ; then
> > >               confvars="$confvars arm_eabihf arm_vfp"
> > >            elif test "${triplet%eabi}" != "$triplet" ; then
> > >               confvars="$confvars arm_eabi"
> > >            fi
> > >            if grep -s -q "^Features.* \(vfp\|iwmmxt\) " /proc/cpuinfo ; then
> > >               confvars="$confvars arm_vfp"
> > >            fi
> > >          fi
> > >
> > >
> > > On my RPi it executes:
> > >
> > >            if test "${triplet%eabihf}" != "$triplet" ; then
> > >               confvars="$confvars arm_eabihf arm_vfp"
> > >
> > > Which, then results to -DTCC_ARM_EABI -DTCC_ARM_HARDFLOAT in Makefile.
> > >
> > > C.
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Tinycc-devel [mailto:address@hidden On Behalf Of Barath Aron
> > > Sent: dimanche 23 décembre 2018 13:55
> > > To: address@hidden
> > > Subject: Re: [Tinycc-devel] When is planned to be released the next version of 
> > > Tcc?
> > >
> > > I figured out. ARM_EXIDX was skipped because TCC_ARM_EABI was not
> > > defined. What I did was just run ./configure without any arguments and
> > > then a "make". Maybe this provides a clue to the maintainers.
> > >
> > > After hacking the defines (-DTCC_ARM_EABI -DTCC_ARM_HARDFLOAT), tcc now
> > > does not crash during linking, because it now cannot compile. Weird.
> > >
> > > Aron
> > >
> > >
> > > On 12/23/18 1:18 PM, Barath Aron wrote:
> > > > In tccelf.c:2359, it clearly jumps to the end of the loop.
> > > > And dies in the next loop: /* second short pass to update... */
> > > >
> > > > Take this gdb fragment as an explanation:
> > > >
> > > > Breakpoint 3, tcc_load_object_file (s1=0x45a098, address@hidden,
> > > >        fd=4562744, address@hidden, file_offset=4563600, address@hidden)
> > > >        at tccelf.c:2357
> > > > 2357            sh_name = (char *) strsec + sh->sh_name;
> > > > (gdb) p i
> > > > $21 = 6
> > > > (gdb) n
> > > > 2359            if (sh->sh_type != SHT_PROGBITS &&
> > > > (gdb) p *sh
> > > > $22 = {sh_name = 79, sh_type = 1879048193, sh_flags = 130, sh_addr = 0,
> > > >      sh_offset = 176, sh_size = 8, sh_link = 2, sh_info = 0, sh_addralign
> > > > = 4,
> > > >      sh_entsize = 0}
> > > > (gdb) n
> > > > 2439        next: ;
> > > > (gdb) n
> > > > 2354            if (i == ehdr.e_shstrndx)
> > > > (gdb) p i
> > > > $23 = 7
> > > >
> > > > 1879048193 == 0x70000001 == SHT_ARM_EXIDX
> > > >
> > > > Aron
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On 12/23/18 11:52 AM, Daniel Glöckner wrote:
> > > > > On Sun, Dec 23, 2018 at 11:44:50AM +0100, Barath Aron wrote:
> > > > > > I traced the whole object loading procedure with gdb:
> > > > > > - ARM_EXIDX (section 6) is definitely not loaded, I traced it with gdb.
> > > > > Where did tcc decide to skip ARM_EXIDX?
> > > > >
> > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > Tinycc-devel mailing list
> > > > > address@hidden
> > > > > https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/tinycc-devel
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > Tinycc-devel mailing list
> > > > address@hidden
> > > > https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/tinycc-devel
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Tinycc-devel mailing list
> > > address@hidden
> > > https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/tinycc-devel
> > >
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Tinycc-devel mailing list
> > > address@hidden
> > > https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/tinycc-devel
> > _______________________________________________
> > Tinycc-devel mailing list
> > address@hidden
> > https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/tinycc-devel
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Tinycc-devel mailing list
> > address@hidden
> > https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/tinycc-devel
>
> _______________________________________________
> Tinycc-devel mailing list
> address@hidden
> https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/tinycc-devel
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Tinycc-devel mailing list
> address@hidden
> https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/tinycc-devel