Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S965264AbcJRUpD (ORCPT ); Tue, 18 Oct 2016 16:45:03 -0400 Received: from mail-it0-f42.google.com ([209.85.214.42]:38627 "EHLO mail-it0-f42.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S965189AbcJRUow (ORCPT ); Tue, 18 Oct 2016 16:44:52 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: References: <4f2251fc-94ee-41d3-cc03-a39cee5a084c@users.sourceforge.net> <1238ba8e-a297-6de5-2e6a-50e6e72e77d3@users.sourceforge.net> From: Jim Davis Date: Tue, 18 Oct 2016 13:44:50 -0700 Message-ID: Subject: Re: Difficulties around "fixdep" for the usage of a kernel build output directory To: SF Markus Elfring Cc: linux-kbuild@vger.kernel.org, Michal Marek , linux-kernel Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1350 Lines: 40 On Tue, Oct 18, 2016 at 10:25 AM, SF Markus Elfring wrote: > Can it be that the passing of the adjusted parameter "HOSTCFLAGS" has got a significant > influence (with unwanted side effects) in this use case? That's probably it. If I strip down your advanced original example to just make defconfig make HOSTCFLAGS=-S then I get a similar error: HOSTCC scripts/basic/fixdep scripts/basic/fixdep: 1: scripts/basic/fixdep: .file: not found scripts/basic/fixdep: 2: scripts/basic/fixdep: .comm: not found scripts/basic/fixdep: 3: scripts/basic/fixdep: .comm: not found scripts/basic/fixdep: 4: scripts/basic/fixdep: .comm: not found scripts/basic/fixdep: 5: scripts/basic/fixdep: .comm: not found scripts/basic/fixdep: 6: scripts/basic/fixdep: .section: not found and so forth. The problem is that, with -S, fixdep isn't build as an executable: jim@krebstar:~/linux-next/scripts/basic$ file fixdep fixdep: assembler source, ASCII text jim@krebstar:~/linux-next/scripts/basic$ more fixdep .file "fixdep.c" .comm insert_extra_deps,4,4 .comm target,8,8 .comm depfile,8,8 .comm cmdline,8,8 .section .rodata I'm guessing that in your original example you wanted to look at the assembly output gcc produced; you'd probably have better luck using objdump for that. -- Jim