[swift-dev] Build Error: Relocation R_X86_64_PC32

William Dillon william at housedillon.com
Tue Mar 22 15:59:21 CDT 2016

WOW!  That is fantastic!  Thanks for sharing.

- Will

> On Mar 22, 2016, at 1:36 PM, Ryan Lovelett <swift-dev at ryan.lovelett.me> wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 22, 2016, at 01:26 PM, William Dillon wrote:
>>> Phew. Well I finally got everything ready to where I could bisect
>>> binutils. I won't bore with the details of what it took to actually be
>>> able to bisect binutils (unless someone actually wants to know).
>> I would be interested if it’s not too much trouble.  I’ve been in a similar predicament with LLVM before.  I’d love to have another tool in the chest in case I have to do such a thing again.
>> - Will
> Not too much trouble at all. In fact, I kind of just want to tell
> someone; so I'm glad you asked!
> The biggest challenge of the whole thing was just getting reproducable
> builds using binutils. For the better part of a week I was unable to
> build a linker that could link even the most basic "Hello World" source.
> Eventually I ended up contacting the binutils package maintainer, Allan
> McRae.
> He pointed out that in order to build binutils on Arch there was a
> specific order of operations. You have to build the
> linux-api-headers->glibc->binutils->gcc->binutils->glibc. This was
> especially true because of the change in the way that relocations occurs
> in the newer binutils. Since Arch is "rolling release" distribution I
> ended up having to make a VM that had a configuration of Arch from early
> February, when I knew all this stuff worked. Once I could compile newer
> versions of binutils and that made all the difference.
> Now that I had a stable process for building binutils the next parts
> were relatively straight forward. When I set out to do this I had
> _thought_ what I am about to describe would be all I'd need to do.
> Effectively I went back to a version/commit of binutils that I new
> worked. I new the last version that worked was package 2.25.1-3; so I
> got the commit hash from the PKGBUILD script [1] that was used to make
> that package. Which turned out to be 2bd25930. Next I wanted the commit
> hash of the package that I knew didn't work 2.26-3; so I got the commit
> hash from PKGBUILD script [2] that was used to make that package. Which
> turned out to be 71090e7a.
> Generally speaking that would have been enough to actually do the
> bisecting. However since I knew the compilation loops were going to be
> long I realized this could take a few hours of compiling and rinse and
> repeat to actually find the script. Luckily `git bisect run` exists.
> `git bisect run` is effectively like manual `git bisect` except you can
> write a script that performs the action you'd perform at each step of
> the bisect.
> From there I wrote a script that provided the steps to build binutils
> from source. Then install that new binutils and compile Swift with that
> updated version. The actual script that I used is right here [3].
> The script ensures that the system gets back to a "pristine" state
> between bisection steps and then compiles and installs binutils. It then
> compiles Swift.
> If anything goes wrong compiling binutils then its considered a
> skippable commit and the script returns 125. If Swift fails to compile
> it was considered a "bad" commit and the script returns 1. If Swift
> compiled cleanly it was a "good" commit and the script returns 0.
> The most important advice I can give you is don't forget the 125 return
> code. If something goes wrong and you prematurely mark a commit as "bad"
> then the entire bisect can complete but erroneously tell you which
> commit was actually the first bad commit. In my opinion its better to
> skip than prematurely mark as bad.
> Once the script was written the hard part was over.
> $ cd /directory/with/binutils/source
> $ git bisect start 71090e7a9dde8d28ff5c4b44d6d83e270d1088e4
> 2bd25930221dea4bf33c13a89c111514491440e2
> $ git bisect run ~/binutils-bisect.sh |& tee -a ~/bisect-output.log
> I put all of the logs and scripts in a Gist just in-case I ever need
> them again in the future [4].
> Hope that was enough information Will.
> [1]
> https://projects.archlinux.org/svntogit/packages.git/diff/trunk/?h=packages%2Fbinutils&id=d5de6c456d1391bf802b675b1b6227f5dd3b7073&context=40&ignorews=0&dt=0
> [2]
> https://projects.archlinux.org/svntogit/packages.git/commit/trunk?h=packages/binutils&id=97e6d52b49ff3882a3ec7a5833ceb4569ac5d914
> [3]
> https://gist.github.com/RLovelett/f73fb5f701035b33417c#file-binutils-bisect-sh
> [4] https://gist.github.com/RLovelett/f73fb5f701035b33417c

More information about the swift-dev mailing list