machine/acle-compat.h missing

[Ian Lepore]

On Tue, 2015-10-20 at 10:17 +0300, Jukka Ukkonen wrote:
> On 10/18/15 19:48, Ian Lepore wrote:
> > We need to be very clear here that the problem is the procedure you
> > are
> > using to build, and not anything with the build system or the
> > compilers.  I build arm 11 images on 10-stable every day, using the
> > documented procedures (which certainly do NOT involve overriding CC
> > and
> > CXX), as do many other people.
> > 
> > The first step of a build is to use the existing system compiler to
> > build the latest compiler, which is then used to build the rest of
> > the
> > source.  The default clang 3.4 on 10-stable has no problem building
> > clang 3.7 as the first step of an arm build, and that clang 3.7 is
> > then
> > used to compile world and kernel.
> 
> Right, since I fell back to using the default cc on 10-stable
> I have kept getting very uninformative linker failed alerts
> when trying to run parallel builds (-j N, where N > 1).
> Eventually I decided to try a build with a single make job only,
> though, it took all ages. Finally the compiler complaints were
> a bit more informative.
> For some reason there were first complaints about truncated
> relocations (R_ARM_CALL and R_ARM_JUMP24) and only then the
> linker failed message. For now I don't have the foggiest idea
> how this could happen, but supposedly this explains the
> mysterious linker failed complaint. One possibility which
> I am going to test is whether -O3 is creating so large code
> that it could be the root cause for the relocation overflows.
> Previously -O3 was just fine, though.
> 
> --jau
> [...]

You keep posting tiny fragments of logs that mean nothing by themselves
and vague descriptions of what you're doing that don't include the
actual commands you're using.  The symptoms you're seeing are those of
mixing architectures when you compile.

Please post a complete log of the build somewhere (a paste site or
similar), along with the command(s) you used to start the build.

-- Ian