[lfs-support] help

Aditya Dixit adityaad27 at gmail.com
Sat Oct 29 07:37:44 PDT 2016

Hey William,

Thanks for response.

After hours of research I could figure out the significance of 139 but I
still need to interpret the reason.

And, as far as I know, my machine doesn't support x86_64 architecture.

So what should I do regarding the architecture (if there is any, if my
machine doesn't support x86_64 architecture)??

And I'm not so well versed as to introduce optimizations in the tool chain
as of now.

On Oct 29, 2016 7:16 PM, "William Harrington" <kb0iic at berzerkula.org> wrote:

On Sat, 29 Oct 2016 08:58:46 +0530
Aditya Dixit <adityaad27 at gmail.com> wrote:

> ../binutils-2.27/configure: line 4507:  2249 Segmentation fault
> (core dumped) ./$ac_file
> configure:4509: $? = 139

Hello Aditya,

Unix systems will return 128 when killed by a signal and then + the signal,
in your case it is 11. You get exit status $? = 139 in the log.

Use valgrind to find the issue. If you are not familiar with valgrind then
go to http://cs.ecs.baylor.edu/~donahoo/tools/valgrind/ for a demo.

For your LFS target, is it a generic X86_64 and can your host run binaries
meant for generic x86_64. Are you introducing any optimizations in the
toolchain for which the host cannot run?


William Harrington
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page

Do not top post on this list.

A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
A: Top-posting.
Q: What is the most annoying thing in e-mail?

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/pipermail/lfs-support/attachments/20161029/ba258f7c/attachment.html>

More information about the lfs-support mailing list