Subject: crtbegin.o, crtend.o

From: "K." <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 12 Jan 1998 16:23:37 +1100 (EST)

um... can anyone point out where these files can be obtained? In our
recent install, (Indy R4600) made from the root-be-0.01 root filesystem
with the recent binutils-2.8.1-2, they are missing. We hacked out dummy
object files (crtbegin has a __main() which calls main() and crtend is
empty) and we can successfully compile simple programs; but before we turn
our attention to compiling nastier pieces of code we would like to check
that we have not tainted our /usr/lib :)

thanks,

K.
--
Conrad Parker [email-masked]
Linux Life: http://www.cse.unsw.edu.au/~conradp/linux/

---

From: [email-masked]
Date: Mon, 12 Jan 1998 09:58:04 +0100

> that we have not tainted our /usr/lib :)

Upgrade your system with all the rpm packages.  root-0.01 was my first
collection of Indy executables and basically_every_ ELF file has bugs in
it ...

  Ralf

---

From: Alex deVries <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 12 Jan 1998 12:18:47 -0500 (EST)

> collection of Indy executables and basically_every_ ELF file has bugs in

On that note, I should probably get around to creating root-0.02 which has
all the 'new' binaries in it...  are there any more files than the ones in
root-0.01 I should add?

- Alex

---

From: Thomas Bogendoerfer <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 12 Jan 1998 19:56:22 +0100

> collection of Indy executables and basically_every_ ELF file has bugs in

but at least with the little endian gcc rpm you want get crtbegin.o and
crtend.o, because they are missing. Neither x86, alpha nor sparc have such
files (at least not in gcc), so they are missing from the redhat .spec file.
Sorry for the late bug report.

Thomas.

-- 
See, you not only have to be a good coder to create a system like Linux,
you have to be a sneaky bastard too ;-)
                   [Linus Torvalds in <[email-masked]>]

---

From: [email-masked]
Date: Tue, 13 Jan 1998 02:36:59 +0100

> all the 'new' binaries in it...  are there any more files than the ones in

Actually I'm thinking about the opposite.  root-0.02.tar.gz was a quite
fat tarball, I think it was about 20mb.  I received some complaints about
it.  If you're going to build a new root-0.2 filesystem, then it should
be stripped down to an absolute minimum that is necessary to allow the
installation of further rpms, partitioning, mounting and more.  Having
gcc in the tarball is overkill and makes maintenance a pain.

  Ralf

---

From: [email-masked]
Date: Tue, 13 Jan 1998 03:36:23 +0100

> Sorry for the late bug report.

I think we had that topic before.  My rpm gcc-2.7.2-2 dated 971213 fixes
that.  Think I never uploaded it, sigh ...

  Ralf

---

From: Alex deVries <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 12 Jan 1998 22:24:17 -0500 (EST)

> it.  If you're going to build a new root-0.2 filesystem, then it should

Alright.  Just to get the ball rolling I've put root-be-0.02.tar.gz in the
GettingStarted directory.  It's completely untested, as I'm a couple of
miles away from my favourite aqua coloured computer. It's about 4.5MB
compressed.

I'd appreciate it if people could tell me if things work before I get rid
of the old one. I suspect it's a little thin.

- Alex