Re: Update on wip-arm-bootstrap

[Vagrant Cascadian <vagrant@debian.org>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2270 bytes --]

On 2021-02-13, Jan Nieuwenhuizen wrote:
> Let's try to bisect where the problem is; we now have tree first
> candidates: gcc-core-mesboot0, glibc-mesboot0 and binutils-mesboot0.
> Luckily, Debian "woody" carries an almost compatible set.  Doing
> someting like
>
> --8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8---
> guix environment --ad-hoc binutils patchelf wget
> wget http://archive.debian.org/debian/pool/main/g/glibc/libc6_2.2.5-11.8_arm.deb
> ar x libc6_2.2.5-11.8_arm.deb 
> tar xf data.tar.gz 
> wget http://archive.debian.org/debian/pool/main/g/glibc/libc6-dev_2.2.5-11.8_arm.deb
> ar x libc6-dev_2.2.5-11.8_arm.deb 
> tar xf data.tar.gz 
> wget http://archive.debian.org/debian/pool/main/b/binutils/binutils_2.12.90.0.1-4_arm.deb
> ar x binutils_2.12.90.0.1-4_arm.deb 
> tar xf data.tar.gz 
> wget http://archive.debian.org/debian/pool/main/g/gcc-2.95/gcc-2.95_2.95.4-27_arm.deb
> ar x gcc-2.95_2.95.4-27_arm.deb
> tar xf data.tar.gz 
> patchelf --print-interpreter usr/bin/as
> /lib/ld-linux.so.2
> patchelf --set-interpreter $PWD/lib/ld-linux.so.2 usr/bin/as
> usr/bin/as
> Illegal instruction
> --8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8---
>
> Hmm...does it?  Using gdb, the problem looks...
>
> --8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8---
> Program received signal SIGILL, Illegal instruction.
> 0xb6ff3b6c in writev () from /home/janneke/src/debian/lib/ld-linux.so.2
> (gdb) disas /r
> Dump of assembler code for function writev:
> [..]
>    0xb6ff3b58 <+28>:	05 20 a0 e1	mov	r2, r5
>    0xb6ff3b5c <+32>:	07 10 a0 e1	mov	r1, r7
>    0xb6ff3b60 <+36>:	00 80 90 e5	ldr	r8, [r0]
>    0xb6ff3b64 <+40>:	06 00 a0 e1	mov	r0, r6
>    0xb6ff3b68 <+44>:	92 00 90 ef	svc	0x00900092
> => 0xb6ff3b6c <+48>:	00 40 a0 e1	mov	r4, r0
> --8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8---
>
> ...pretty familiar.  So, what's going on here?  Do the "woody"
> binaries not run on novena?

My guess would be OABI (debian "arm" architecture) vs. EABI (debian
"armel" or "armhf" architectures). The hardware may likly support OABI,
but the kernel may need a compatibility layer enabled.

  https://wiki.debian.org/ArmPorts


live well,
  vagrant

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 227 bytes --]