[Bug binutils/14289] bfd_pef_xlib_read_header reads beyond array bounds
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=14289 Nick Clifton nickc at redhat dot com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED CC||nickc at redhat dot com Resolution|--- |FIXED --- Comment #4 from Nick Clifton nickc at redhat dot com --- Patch approved and applied. Cheers Nick -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ bug-binutils mailing list bug-binutils@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
[Bug binutils/14289] bfd_pef_xlib_read_header reads beyond array bounds
http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=14289 --- Comment #6 from Nick Clifton nickc at redhat dot com --- Hi Yuanhui BTW: Is it possible to use my real name instead of the nick name in the change log message? My real name is Yuanhui Zhang. My nick name is Asmwarrior. Done. Cheers Nick -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ bug-binutils mailing list bug-binutils@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
[Bug binutils/11983] libbfd reuses pointer passed to bfd_openr
http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=11983 --- Comment #11 from Nick Clifton nickc at redhat dot com --- Hi Tom, On further reflection I think the patch as applied will cause gdb crashes. Due to the historical oddity of how the BFD's filename was handled, gdb chose to go its own route and reallocate the filename on the BFD's objalloc. Hang on - are you saying that GDB alters the contents of the filename field inside the BFD structure ? If so, then surely the correct thing to do now is to remove that piece of code from GDB. Also IIRC from when I looked into this, some of the binutils also play games with the filename. I think a fuller audit is needed. I ran as many checks as I could and visually inspected all of the code. I think that I found everywhere that the filename is touched. At least inside the binutils that is. Cheers Nick -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ bug-binutils mailing list bug-binutils@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
[Bug binutils/16199] Objcopy crash when section alignment is zero
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16199 Nick Clifton nickc at redhat dot com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED CC||nickc at redhat dot com Resolution|--- |FIXED --- Comment #3 from Nick Clifton nickc at redhat dot com --- Hi Joshua, Thanks for the bug report and patch. I decided that it would be better to patch the vma_page_aligned_bias function, in case it is ever called from other locations with an alignment of zero. Cheers Nick -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ bug-binutils mailing list bug-binutils@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
[Bug ld/16202] ABS8 and ABS16 get wrong addend on ARM-ELF (big endian)
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16202 Nick Clifton nickc at redhat dot com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||nickc at redhat dot com --- Comment #1 from Nick Clifton nickc at redhat dot com --- Created attachment 7337 -- https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=7337action=edit Proposed patch -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ bug-binutils mailing list bug-binutils@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
[Bug ld/16202] ABS8 and ABS16 get wrong addend on ARM-ELF (big endian)
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16202 Nick Clifton nickc at redhat dot com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |WAITING --- Comment #2 from Nick Clifton nickc at redhat dot com --- Hi Ma, I do not think that refetching the addend in the ABS8 and ABS16 cases is the right thing to do. There could be other relocations that are affected by the same problem. Instead I think that the correct thing to do is to fetch the addend using the proper bfd_get_XX macro in the first place. Please could you try out the uploaded patch and let me know if it works for you ? Cheers Nick -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ bug-binutils mailing list bug-binutils@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
[Bug ld/16202] ABS8 and ABS16 get wrong addend on ARM-ELF (big endian)
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16202 Nick Clifton nickc at redhat dot com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|WAITING |RESOLVED Resolution|--- |FIXED --- Comment #6 from Nick Clifton nickc at redhat dot com --- Hi Ma, OK, I agree - just updating ABS8 and ABS16 is the safer change. So I have checked in the patch you suggested, along with one minor change - the addend is only refetched when using REL relocs. Cheers Nick -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ bug-binutils mailing list bug-binutils@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
[Bug gas/16434] Failed to build for z80-unknown-coff
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16434 Nick Clifton nickc at redhat dot com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED CC||nickc at redhat dot com Resolution|--- |FIXED --- Comment #3 from Nick Clifton nickc at redhat dot com --- Hi Alexander, Thanks for reporting this problem. I have checked in a patch which should allow you to compile the z80-unknown-coff assembler now. Cheers Nick -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ bug-binutils mailing list bug-binutils@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
[Bug binutils/16433] objdump -l reports wrong line numbers
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16433 Nick Clifton nickc at redhat dot com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |WAITING CC||nickc at redhat dot com --- Comment #1 from Nick Clifton nickc at redhat dot com --- Hi Andi, But when showing context it should adjust the line nr to the context offset. Why should it do this ? Is it documented that it will ? The current behaviour is to display the context leading up to the specified line, rather than the context from the specified line to the line is responsible for generating the disassembly that follows. This makes sense to me. The line number displayed is the number of the line that caused the assembler to be generated. Cheers Nick PS. In future bug reports it would be helpful if you could provide additional information such as the target environment and the command line used to compile the test case. It also helps if you test with the latest binutils. 2.22 is now two releases old... -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ bug-binutils mailing list bug-binutils@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
[Bug ld/16563] New: Corrupt .eh-frame section created when linking LTO and non-LTO objects
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16563 Bug ID: 16563 Summary: Corrupt .eh-frame section created when linking LTO and non-LTO objects Product: binutils Version: 2.25 (HEAD) Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: P2 Component: ld Assignee: unassigned at sourceware dot org Reporter: nickc at redhat dot com Created attachment 7405 -- https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=7405action=edit Files needed to reproduce problem Linking together LTO and non-LTO objects can result in a corrupt .eh_frame section. To reproduce this run the following command on the uploaded x86_64 object files: % g++ -o broken.exe -O0 -flto -fno-fat-lto-objects -flto-partition=none \ a.o b.o -Wl,--no-demangle Then examine the contents of the .eh_frame section with: % readelf -w broken.exe /dev/null Warning: Invalid CIE pointer 0xfccc in FDE at 0x40 The a.o and b.o object files were produced as follows (sources also uploaded): % g++ -c -O0 -flto -fno-fat-lto-objects a.cpp % g++ -c -O0 b.cpp Note - compiling both a.cpp and b.cpp with LTO results in a working binary. So does compiling them both without LTO. Also if the -Wl,-traditional linker command line option is included on the g++ command line then the link works. (This is because traditional linking disables the optimization of the .eh_frame section). -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ bug-binutils mailing list bug-binutils@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
[Bug ld/16017] LD creates invalid PLT instructions on CORTEX-M3
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16017 Nick Clifton nickc at redhat dot com changed: What|Removed |Added Attachment #7291|0 |1 is obsolete|| Attachment #7314|0 |1 is obsolete|| --- Comment #19 from Nick Clifton nickc at redhat dot com --- Created attachment 7414 -- https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=7414action=edit v4 of patch, now with added mapping symbols Hi Guys, I have uploaded a revised version of the patch containing the fixed PLT entry code. If someone can confirm that this works I will be happy to check it in. Note - this version of the patch also adds in setting the mapping symbols correctly so that the .plt section can be disassembled correctly. Cheers Nick -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ bug-binutils mailing list bug-binutils@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
[Bug ld/16017] LD creates invalid PLT instructions on CORTEX-M3
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16017 Nick Clifton nickc at redhat dot com changed: What|Removed |Added Attachment #7414|0 |1 is obsolete|| --- Comment #21 from Nick Clifton nickc at redhat dot com --- Created attachment 7415 -- https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=7415action=edit Fix typo. Extend supported GOT offsets to 32-bits Hi Meadori, Ooops - you are right. The mask was a typo, and the lack of full 32-bit GOT offset support was just plain laziness. Please try out this revised version instead. Cheers Nick -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ bug-binutils mailing list bug-binutils@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
[Bug ld/16017] LD creates invalid PLT instructions on CORTEX-M3
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16017 Nick Clifton nickc at redhat dot com changed: What|Removed |Added Attachment #7415|0 |1 is obsolete|| --- Comment #23 from Nick Clifton nickc at redhat dot com --- Created attachment 7416 -- https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=7416action=edit Fix another typo; remove assert Hi Meadori, Thanks again for checking the patch. I have uploaded another version. This time it will work and no-one will have to be nailed to anything. (Sorry - old quote...) Cheers Nick -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ bug-binutils mailing list bug-binutils@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
[Bug ld/16604] linker adds padding before rodata but doesn't adjust symbol
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16604 Nick Clifton nickc at redhat dot com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||nickc at redhat dot com --- Comment #2 from Nick Clifton nickc at redhat dot com --- Hi Joe, I tried to reproduce this problem using the mainline versions of gcc, gdb and the binutils, but this failed. (Ie the array contained the correct values). Please could you upload the dl.o and dlm.o object files and the broken dl executable so that I can have a look at them ? Cheers Nick -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ bug-binutils mailing list bug-binutils@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
[Bug binutils/16583] Failed to compile on solaris 11.1 with gcc
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16583 Nick Clifton nickc at redhat dot com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||nickc at redhat dot com --- Comment #1 from Nick Clifton nickc at redhat dot com --- Created attachment 7431 -- https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=7431action=edit Proposed patch -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ bug-binutils mailing list bug-binutils@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
[Bug binutils/16583] Failed to compile on solaris 11.1 with gcc
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16583 Nick Clifton nickc at redhat dot com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED --- Comment #2 from Nick Clifton nickc at redhat dot com --- Hi Sergey, Please could you try out the uploaded patch and let me know if this is sufficient to allow the binutils to be built ? Cheers Nick -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ bug-binutils mailing list bug-binutils@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
[Bug binutils/16583] Failed to compile on solaris 11.1 with gcc
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16583 Nick Clifton nickc at redhat dot com changed: What|Removed |Added Attachment #7431|0 |1 is obsolete|| --- Comment #3 from Nick Clifton nickc at redhat dot com --- Created attachment 7432 -- https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=7432action=edit oops - fix thinko -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ bug-binutils mailing list bug-binutils@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
[Bug ld/16569] --cref does not respect --no-demangle
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16569 Nick Clifton nickc at redhat dot com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED CC||nickc at redhat dot com Resolution|--- |FIXED --- Comment #2 from Nick Clifton nickc at redhat dot com --- Hi Dan, Thanks for the bug report. I have looked over the patch you supplied and found no problems so I have gone ahead and checked it in to the sources. Cheers Nick -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ bug-binutils mailing list bug-binutils@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
[Bug ld/16017] LD creates invalid PLT instructions on CORTEX-M3
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16017 Nick Clifton nickc at redhat dot com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|SUSPENDED |RESOLVED Resolution|--- |FIXED --- Comment #27 from Nick Clifton nickc at redhat dot com --- I have checked in the final version of the patch. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ bug-binutils mailing list bug-binutils@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
[Bug binutils/16664] segmentation fault in process_attributes() of readelf.c
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16664 Nick Clifton nickc at redhat dot com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED CC||nickc at redhat dot com Resolution|--- |FIXED --- Comment #2 from Nick Clifton nickc at redhat dot com --- Hi Lei, Thanks for reporting this bug, and for providing a test case. I have checked in a patch to fix the problem, although I suspect that there will be further situations where malformed attribute sections can trigger seg-faults. Feel free to file more reports if you encoutner any of those. Cheers Nick -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ bug-binutils mailing list bug-binutils@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
[Bug binutils/16567] Compilation warnings in DllTool
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16567 Nick Clifton nickc at redhat dot com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|--- |FIXED --- Comment #2 from Nick Clifton nickc at redhat dot com --- Hi Dmitry, Thanks for the bug report. I have checked your suggested patch in to the sources. Cheers Nick -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ bug-binutils mailing list bug-binutils@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
[Bug binutils/16652] ar manual suggests --plugin can come before the operation code on the command line
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16652 Nick Clifton nickc at redhat dot com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED CC||nickc at redhat dot com Resolution|--- |FIXED --- Comment #1 from Nick Clifton nickc at redhat dot com --- Hi Martin, Thanks for pointing this out. I have updated the documentation so that the --plugin option is now listed after the command option rather than before it. Cheers Nick -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ bug-binutils mailing list bug-binutils@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
[Bug gas/16688] aarch64: bignums in literal pools do not work correctly
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16688 Nick Clifton nickc at redhat dot com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||nickc at redhat dot com --- Comment #2 from Nick Clifton nickc at redhat dot com --- Created attachment 7467 -- https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=7467action=edit Proposed patch Hi Will, Please try out this patch and let me know if it works for you. Cheers Nick -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ bug-binutils mailing list bug-binutils@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
[Bug ld/16671] Crash in elf32_arm_add_symbol_hook
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16671 Nick Clifton nickc at redhat dot com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED CC||nickc at redhat dot com Resolution|--- |FIXED --- Comment #2 from Nick Clifton nickc at redhat dot com --- Hi Ryan, Thanks for the bug report. This appears to be a simple case of not checking the type of binary before attempting to access target specific information about it, so I have checked in an obvious patch to fix it. Please let us know if you encounter any more problems like this. Cheers Nick -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ bug-binutils mailing list bug-binutils@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
[Bug gas/16688] aarch64: bignums in literal pools do not work correctly
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16688 Nick Clifton nickc at redhat dot com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|--- |FIXED --- Comment #5 from Nick Clifton nickc at redhat dot com --- Hi Will, Whitespace removed, free added, testcase added, patch committed. :-) Cheers Nick PS. Just thought - the ARM port is going to need a patch like this too, isn't it ? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ bug-binutils mailing list bug-binutils@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
[Bug binutils/16664] segmentation fault in process_attributes() of readelf.c
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16664 --- Comment #5 from Nick Clifton nickc at redhat dot com --- Patch applied. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ bug-binutils mailing list bug-binutils@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
[Bug gas/16694] gas does not accept ARM VFP registers in .cfi_offset directives
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16694 Nick Clifton nickc at redhat dot com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||nickc at redhat dot com --- Comment #1 from Nick Clifton nickc at redhat dot com --- Created attachment 7470 -- https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=7470action=edit Proposed patch Hi Hans, Please try out the uploaded patch and let me know what you think. Cheers Nick -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ bug-binutils mailing list bug-binutils@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
[Bug gas/16694] gas does not accept ARM VFP registers in .cfi_offset directives
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16694 Nick Clifton nickc at redhat dot com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|--- |FIXED --- Comment #4 from Nick Clifton nickc at redhat dot com --- Hi Hans, I have committed a slightly improved version of the patch, along with an addition to the gas testsuite to make sure that the VFP registers will continue to be accepted in .cfi_offset statements. Cheers Nick -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ bug-binutils mailing list bug-binutils@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
[Bug ld/16761] [PATCH] fix parallel make for cygwin/mingw target
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16761 Nick Clifton nickc at redhat dot com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|--- |FIXED --- Comment #2 from Nick Clifton nickc at redhat dot com --- Hi Yaakov, Thanks for the bug report and patch. I have now applied the patch to the mainstream sources. Cheers Nick -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ bug-binutils mailing list bug-binutils@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
[Bug ld/16744] '-z noexecstack' does not add .note.GNU-stack for relocatables
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16744 Nick Clifton nickc at redhat dot com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||nickc at redhat dot com --- Comment #5 from Nick Clifton nickc at redhat dot com --- Created attachment 7494 -- https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=7494action=edit Proposed patch Hi David, Please could you try out the uploaded patch and see if it works for you. Cheers Nick -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ bug-binutils mailing list bug-binutils@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
[Bug ld/16744] '-z noexecstack' does not add .note.GNU-stack for relocatables
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16744 Nick Clifton nickc at redhat dot com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|--- |FIXED --- Comment #8 from Nick Clifton nickc at redhat dot com --- Patch comitted. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ bug-binutils mailing list bug-binutils@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
[Bug ld/16790] [cygwin|mingw] ld -v creates a.exe
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16790 --- Comment #1 from Nick Clifton nickc at redhat dot com --- Created attachment 7519 -- https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=7519action=edit Disable output if only -v or --verbose or --version is specified on the command line -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ bug-binutils mailing list bug-binutils@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
[Bug ld/16790] [cygwin|mingw] ld -v creates a.exe
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16790 Nick Clifton nickc at redhat dot com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED --- Comment #2 from Nick Clifton nickc at redhat dot com --- I have uploaded a potential fix for the problem. Please give it a try. I am uncertain as to whether this is the right thing to do however. Maybe it would be better to rethink the whole linker-is-responsible-for-adding-the-default-manifest idea. IMHO it would be better if gcc/libgcc did this - after all it already has the multilib mechanism in place and it already builds files like crt0.o and crtend.o. Why not add default-manifest.o to the list ? The answer, as I understand it, is that the cygwin developers want the manifest added even if gcc is not used to link the application. So maybe it is time to impose a requirement to use gcc to link all cygwin and mingw binaries ? Cheers Nick -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ bug-binutils mailing list bug-binutils@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
[Bug ld/16787] LD gives wrong error messages
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16787 Nick Clifton nickc at redhat dot com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||nickc at redhat dot com --- Comment #1 from Nick Clifton nickc at redhat dot com --- Hi Ma, bug.sh tries to compile a file called tt.c which is missing from bin.zip. Could you upload that file please ? Cheers Nick -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ bug-binutils mailing list bug-binutils@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
[Bug gas/16765] Assertion failure in create_unwind_entry
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16765 Nick Clifton nickc at redhat dot com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||nickc at redhat dot com --- Comment #2 from Nick Clifton nickc at redhat dot com --- Created attachment 7520 -- https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=7520action=edit Proposed gcc patch -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ bug-binutils mailing list bug-binutils@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
[Bug gas/16765] Assertion failure in create_unwind_entry
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16765 --- Comment #3 from Nick Clifton nickc at redhat dot com --- Created attachment 7521 -- https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=7521action=edit Applied gas patch -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ bug-binutils mailing list bug-binutils@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
[Bug gas/16765] Assertion failure in create_unwind_entry
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16765 Nick Clifton nickc at redhat dot com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|--- |FIXED --- Comment #4 from Nick Clifton nickc at redhat dot com --- Hi Fabian, This is a gcc bug, as you guessed. So you need to report it on the gcc-bugs mailing list. When you do, you might like to include the arm.c patch uploaded here which will fix the problem(*). Gas should not be generating an internal error however, even when given bad assembler input, so I have applied a small patch to replace the assertion with an error message. Cheers Nick PS. FYI I was not able to reproduce the bug using the assembler file that you uploaded but I was able to reproduce it when building a toolchain with the configuration options you specified. I was also able to capture the gas command line and assembler input by adding --save-temps -v to the gcc command line. (*) After applying the patches in this PR I tried continuing the build. It failed with: libstdc++-v3/libsupc++/eh_throw.cc: In function 'void __cxxabiv1::__cxa_throw(void*, std::type_info*, void (*)(void*))': /work/sources/gcc/current/libstdc++-v3/libsupc++/eh_throw.cc:80:57: error: '_Unwind_SjLj_RaiseException' was not declared in this scope _Unwind_SjLj_RaiseException (header-exc.unwindHeader); ^ libstdc++-v3/libsupc++/eh_throw.cc: In function 'void __cxxabiv1::__cxa_rethrow(...)': /work/sources/gcc/current/libstdc++-v3/libsupc++/eh_throw.cc:113:60: error: '_Unwind_SjLj_Resume_or_Rethrow' was not declared in this scope _Unwind_SjLj_Resume_or_Rethrow (header-unwindHeader); ^ make[3]: *** [eh_throw.lo] Error 1 I suspect that setjmp/longjmp exception handling support may have bit-rotted. At least for the ARM anyway. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ bug-binutils mailing list bug-binutils@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
[Bug binutils/14698] ar, nm and ranlib don't use gcc's liblto_plugin.so in BINDIR/../lib/bfd-plugins automatically
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=14698 Nick Clifton nickc at redhat dot com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|REOPENED|RESOLVED CC||nickc at redhat dot com Resolution|--- |FIXED --- Comment #6 from Nick Clifton nickc at redhat dot com --- Sorry for the delay ibn reviewing the patch. The patch is acceptable and so I have checked it in. Cheers Nick -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ bug-binutils mailing list bug-binutils@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
[Bug binutils/13227] GCC now produce slim LTO files. Those can't be linked/archived or nm w/o plugin used. It would be useful to output diagnostics when user attempts so
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=13227 Bug 13227 depends on bug 14698, which changed state. Bug 14698 Summary: ar, nm and ranlib don't use gcc's liblto_plugin.so in BINDIR/../lib/bfd-plugins automatically https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=14698 What|Removed |Added Status|REOPENED|RESOLVED Resolution|--- |FIXED -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ bug-binutils mailing list bug-binutils@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
[Bug ld/16787] LD gives wrong error messages
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16787 Nick Clifton nickc at redhat dot com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |WAITING --- Comment #4 from Nick Clifton nickc at redhat dot com --- Hi Ma, Thanks for the tt.c file. I think however that this might be a bug that has already been fixed. Using today's FSF gcc and binutils mainline sources I built your test case, but the linker gave the correct error messages: % arm-eabi-gcc tt.c t1234.o -o tt -static -g t1234.o: In function `t1': t1.c:2: undefined reference to `getgrgid' t1234.o: In function `t3': t3.c:2: undefined reference to `udf' Which version of the binutils are you using ? If it is the 2.24 release, then please could you try the current mainline sources and see if the problem persists. Cheers Nick -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ bug-binutils mailing list bug-binutils@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
[Bug ld/16807] Bad behavior with resources of Windows applications with recent binutils upgrade on Cygwin64
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16807 --- Comment #1 from Nick Clifton nickc at redhat dot com --- Hi Corinna, I have started looking into this bug, but I am a bit stumped. :-( I guess that the problem is connected with the default manifest being added in to the executable's resources. But looking at the decompiled resources in the dlg_one.out executable everything looks fine. Then I started to wonder. Maybe it is the fact that there are now *3* top level entries in the resource Type table instead of 2. Maybe the dlg_one.c application only expects there to be 2 entries and somehow it is getting confused. Unfortunately I am not enough of a Window resource expert to tell. But you are... So - is this a possibility ? Cheers Nick -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ bug-binutils mailing list bug-binutils@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
[Bug ld/16790] [cygwin|mingw] ld -v creates a.exe
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16790 --- Comment #7 from Nick Clifton nickc at redhat dot com --- Hi Corinna, After some discussion with Jon_Y and Yaakov on IRC, I'm pretty much ok with moving the default-manifest handling to GCC. Excellent! :-) I'm just wondering if the default-manifest shouldn't then be made into its own package, independent of binutils and GCC, so that we can update the default manifest if a new Windows comes out, without having to update binutils or GCC packages as well. I guess that this could happen, Although maybe it could become part of the Cygwin and MinGW projects instead ? I assume that they are the only ones that need the default manifest. Hmm, that does mean keeping two copies of the manifest in sync in different projects, which is not ideal. So maybe a separate project would be better. How does one go about creating a new project anyway ? If we do that, GCC would have to handle three situations: - The default-manifest.o file doesn't exist in the search path. Don't even try to add it to the command line. Should GCC issue a warning in this case. (Assuming that it would want to add the default manifest to the linker command line if it could be found). - The manifest file exists, the -shared option is given. Don't add default-manifest.o to the command line. - The manifest file exists, the -shared option is not given. Append default-manifest.o to the command line. Will that work? Yes. Should be quite straightforward. Cheers Nick -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ bug-binutils mailing list bug-binutils@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
[Bug ld/16787] LD gives wrong error messages
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16787 --- Comment #6 from Nick Clifton nickc at redhat dot com --- Hi Ma, Please could you upload the libc.a and libg.a files that you are using. I have tried to find some on the net, but so far I have failed. :-( Cheers Nick -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ bug-binutils mailing list bug-binutils@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
[Bug ld/16821] x86_64 PE/COFF: ld truncates addresses of symbols from linker scripts to 32 bit
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16821 Nick Clifton nickc at redhat dot com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||nickc at redhat dot com --- Comment #1 from Nick Clifton nickc at redhat dot com --- Created attachment 7543 -- https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=7543action=edit Partial patch -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ bug-binutils mailing list bug-binutils@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
[Bug ld/16821] x86_64 PE/COFF: ld truncates addresses of symbols from linker scripts to 32 bit
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16821 Nick Clifton nickc at redhat dot com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED --- Comment #2 from Nick Clifton nickc at redhat dot com --- Hi Corinna, DJ has found the cause of the problem: the PE and PE32+ file formats store the value of symbols in a 32-bit field. For section relative symbols this amount is usually enough, as section addresses can be 64-bit. But for absolute symbols any value needing more than 32-bits is silently truncated by the linker. I have uploaded a patch which is a partial fix for the problem. It detects out-of-range absolute values and tries to convert them into section relative values. This works for most cases, but it fails for the __image_base__ and __ImageBase__ symbols, and possibly some others that I have not yet encountered. The problem is that these symbols have a value which is less than the lowest addressed section, but higher than 1^32. (Note the value of ImageBase in the PE header is not affected by this problem. It is only the *symbols* __image_base__ and __ImageBase__ that are affected). One thing that patch does not do at the moment is issue an error message when it knows that the truncation is taking place and it has not found a way around it. I omitted the warning because I know that it will be triggered for every x86_64 cygwin binary that gets built, and most, if not all of them, do not care about the value of __image_base__. Any suggestions as to how to handle __image_base__ will be greatfully received. Cheers Nick -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ bug-binutils mailing list bug-binutils@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
[Bug ld/16787] LD gives wrong error messages
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16787 Nick Clifton nickc at redhat dot com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED --- Comment #10 from Nick Clifton nickc at redhat dot com --- Sorry, but I still canont reproduce this failure. :-( H.J. - your test case does not demonstrated the problem, at least as far as I can see. It shows the linker not referencing any source file when complaining about the undefined reference: t13.o: In function `t3': (.text+0x1a): undefined reference to `udf' Ma's bug report, if I understand it correctly, is about the linker referencing the wrong source file (t4.c) in its output. Incidentally when I run your test case on my system (x86_64 Fedora 20) I get the correct output: gcc -B./ -o x t13.o tt.o t2.o t13.o: In function `t1': /home/nickc/work/builds/gcc/current/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/tests/t1.c:2: warning: foobar t13.o: In function `t3': /home/nickc/work/builds/gcc/current/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/tests/t3.c:2: undefined reference to `udf' Ma - your proposed patch might work - I have no way to test it at the moment - but it does also have one flaw. It calls _bfd_dwarf2_cleanup_debug_info without first checking to see if the input object file is an ELF format file. Ideally when we do have a fix for this problem we should add a test case to the linker testsuite as well. Do you think that you could write one ? That way, assuming that the test works for non-ARM based ELF targets I might be able to reproduce the problem myself. Cheers Nick -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ bug-binutils mailing list bug-binutils@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
[Bug ld/16807] Bad behavior with resources of Windows applications with recent binutils upgrade on Cygwin64
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16807 Nick Clifton nickc at redhat dot com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED --- Comment #4 from Nick Clifton nickc at redhat dot com --- Hi Angelo, Hi Corinna, Please could you try out the uploaded patch. I think that it should work for this particular test case, but I also think that it will fail when you have multiple resources with identical entries. If you can find a test case for that and try it out too that would be very helpful. Cheers Nick -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ bug-binutils mailing list bug-binutils@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
[Bug ld/16807] Bad behavior with resources of Windows applications with recent binutils upgrade on Cygwin64
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16807 --- Comment #3 from Nick Clifton nickc at redhat dot com --- Created attachment 7550 -- https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=7550action=edit Proposed patch -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ bug-binutils mailing list bug-binutils@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
[Bug ld/16821] x86_64 PE/COFF: ld truncates addresses of symbols from linker scripts to 32 bit
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16821 --- Comment #10 from Nick Clifton nickc at redhat dot com --- Thanks Yuanhui - patch applied. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ bug-binutils mailing list bug-binutils@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
[Bug ld/16807] Bad behavior with resources of Windows applications with recent binutils upgrade on Cygwin64
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16807 --- Comment #6 from Nick Clifton nickc at redhat dot com --- Hi Angelo, Hmm, the patch does work in my tests. My guess is either the patched linker was not installed, or that it was installed but gcc was using the old linker. $ ./configure --prefix=/usr/local/binutils-test $ make $ make install Could you try adding: $ make all-ld $ make install-ld $ ls /usr/local/binutils-test/bin $ gcc -Wall -mwindows dlg_one.c dlg_one.res -o dlg_one.out Could you adding -v -Wl,-debug to the gcc command line, and see if you can find which ld executable is being run ? Cheers Nick -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ bug-binutils mailing list bug-binutils@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
[Bug ld/16807] Bad behavior with resources of Windows applications with recent binutils upgrade on Cygwin64
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16807 Nick Clifton nickc at redhat dot com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|--- |FIXED --- Comment #8 from Nick Clifton nickc at redhat dot com --- Hi Angelo, Sorry about my previous post. You were right - the uploaded patch did not work. But I have now tracked down the problem - an undocumented requirement that resource data be 8-byte aligned. I have checked in a patch to fix this and you should now find that the linker merges resources correctly. Cheers Nick -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ bug-binutils mailing list bug-binutils@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
[Bug gas/16858] weak external reference has wrong value
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16858 Nick Clifton nickc at redhat dot com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED --- Comment #6 from Nick Clifton nickc at redhat dot com --- Hi Bernd, Please try out the uploaded patch and let me know if it works for you. Cheers Nick -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ bug-binutils mailing list bug-binutils@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
[Bug gas/16858] weak external reference has wrong value
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16858 Nick Clifton nickc at redhat dot com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||nickc at redhat dot com --- Comment #5 from Nick Clifton nickc at redhat dot com --- Created attachment 7560 -- https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=7560action=edit Proposed patch -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ bug-binutils mailing list bug-binutils@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
[Bug gas/16858] weak external reference has wrong value
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16858 --- Comment #11 from Nick Clifton nickc at redhat dot com --- Created attachment 7600 -- https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=7600action=edit Proposed new patch -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ bug-binutils mailing list bug-binutils@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
[Bug gas/16858] weak external reference has wrong value
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16858 --- Comment #12 from Nick Clifton nickc at redhat dot com --- Hi Bernd, Please try out the newly uploaded patch (in addition to the previous one). Let me know how you get on. Cheers Nick -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ bug-binutils mailing list bug-binutils@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
[Bug gas/16858] weak external reference has wrong value
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16858 Nick Clifton nickc at redhat dot com changed: What|Removed |Added Attachment #7600|0 |1 is obsolete|| --- Comment #13 from Nick Clifton nickc at redhat dot com --- Created attachment 7603 -- https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=7603action=edit Revised patch which does not affect non-code symbols -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ bug-binutils mailing list bug-binutils@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
[Bug gas/16858] weak external reference has wrong value
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16858 --- Comment #14 from Nick Clifton nickc at redhat dot com --- Hi Bernd, Actually here is a better patch. The previous one also affected non-code weak symbols which was the wrong thing to do. Please try this patch out and let me know if you are happy with it. Cheers Nick -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ bug-binutils mailing list bug-binutils@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
[Bug gas/16858] weak external reference has wrong value
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16858 --- Comment #16 from Nick Clifton nickc at redhat dot com --- Hi Bernd, both variants of your patch do not affect x86_64, only 32-bit? Yes. According to my test the x86_64 target is already working. (After the first patch was applied). It was only the 32-bit target that remained broken. can you give an example of these non-code weak symbols? Yes - the linker test ld/testsuite/ld-scripts/weak.* This test breaks if you applied the patch I proposed yesterday, but passes if you apply today's patch. Cheers Nick -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ bug-binutils mailing list bug-binutils@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
[Bug gas/16946] [v850-elf] Intenal error : tc-v850.c line 3248 in md_assemble
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16946 Nick Clifton nickc at redhat dot com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||nickc at redhat dot com --- Comment #3 from Nick Clifton nickc at redhat dot com --- Created attachment 7604 -- https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=7604action=edit Error when ctoff() is used with RH850 ABI -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ bug-binutils mailing list bug-binutils@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
[Bug gas/16946] [v850-elf] Intenal error : tc-v850.c line 3248 in md_assemble
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16946 Nick Clifton nickc at redhat dot com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED --- Comment #4 from Nick Clifton nickc at redhat dot com --- Hi Masaki-san, You appear to be using an old version of gcc with a newer version of the binutils. The problem is that with the newer binutils the default ABI supported by the assembler is the RH850 ABI, and this does not support the ctoff() pseudo-op. If you were using a newer version of gcc then this would not be a problem - the callt instruction would not be generated. You could work around this problem by compiling with -Wa,-mgcc-abi or -mdisable-callt. I have uploaded a patch which will make the assembler issue an error message instead of generating an internal fault. Please could you try it out and let me know if you have any problems with it. Cheers Nick -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ bug-binutils mailing list bug-binutils@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
[Bug gas/16946] [v850-elf] Intenal error : tc-v850.c line 3248 in md_assemble
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16946 Nick Clifton nickc at redhat dot com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|--- |FIXED --- Comment #7 from Nick Clifton nickc at redhat dot com --- Patch applied. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ bug-binutils mailing list bug-binutils@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
[Bug gas/16858] weak external reference has wrong value
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16858 Nick Clifton nickc at redhat dot com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|REOPENED|RESOLVED Resolution|--- |FIXED --- Comment #19 from Nick Clifton nickc at redhat dot com --- Closed for now - I am considering how to make a test case for this PR. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ bug-binutils mailing list bug-binutils@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
[Bug ld/16807] Bad behavior with resources of Windows applications with recent binutils upgrade on Cygwin64
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16807 --- Comment #19 from Nick Clifton nickc at redhat dot com --- Created attachment 7625 -- https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=7625action=edit Additional patch - page align the .rsrc section -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ bug-binutils mailing list bug-binutils@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
[Bug ld/16807] Bad behavior with resources of Windows applications with recent binutils upgrade on Cygwin64
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16807 Nick Clifton nickc at redhat dot com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED Resolution|FIXED |--- --- Comment #20 from Nick Clifton nickc at redhat dot com --- Hi Ken, Angelo, Chris, This problem appears to be due to requirement to page-align the .rsrc section. Please could you try out the newly uploaded patch and let me know if it resolves the problem for you. Cheers Nick -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ bug-binutils mailing list bug-binutils@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
[Bug ld/16807] Bad behavior with resources of Windows applications with recent binutils upgrade on Cygwin64
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16807 Nick Clifton nickc at redhat dot com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|REOPENED|RESOLVED Resolution|--- |FIXED --- Comment #23 from Nick Clifton nickc at redhat dot com --- New patch applied. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ bug-binutils mailing list bug-binutils@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
[Bug binutils/16252] readelf -wF mishandles DW_CFA_restore_state
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16252 Nick Clifton nickc at redhat dot com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED CC||nickc at redhat dot com Resolution|--- |FIXED --- Comment #3 from Nick Clifton nickc at redhat dot com --- Patch applied. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ bug-binutils mailing list bug-binutils@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
[Bug binutils/16698] BFD (GNU Binutils) 2.24 assertion fail elf32-arm.c:12387
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16698 --- Comment #6 from Nick Clifton nickc at redhat dot com --- The testcase is missing a definition of the function pcap_offline_read(). If a dummy one is supplied then the test compiles and links without any problems - except for a few warnings from gcc about assignments making pointers from integers - using the latest gcc and binutils sources. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ bug-binutils mailing list bug-binutils@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
[Bug gas/16964] LSL Rxx instruction assembles to add Rxx,Rxx on AVR
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16964 Nick Clifton nickc at redhat dot com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||nickc at redhat dot com --- Comment #2 from Nick Clifton nickc at redhat dot com --- Hi Scott, What LS instruction ? I guess I must have out of date specs, but in the AVR Instruction Set man ual that I have (Rev.0856I – 07/10) there is no LSL instruction. Or ra ther there is, but it is just an alias for ADD. Cheers Nick -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ bug-binutils mailing list bug-binutils@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
[Bug binutils/16698] BFD (GNU Binutils) 2.24 assertion fail elf32-arm.c:12387
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16698 --- Comment #8 from Nick Clifton nickc at redhat dot com --- Created attachment 7639 -- https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=7639action=edit Built executable I must be doing something wrong, because I am able to build the executable. (See the uploaded file). Could you upload your libtest1.a and test.o files ? Maybe I can use these to reproduec the problem. Cheers Nick -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ bug-binutils mailing list bug-binutils@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
[Bug binutils/16949] arm-none-eabi-objdump segfaults when disassembling ARM BE elf file
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16949 Nick Clifton nickc at redhat dot com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||nickc at redhat dot com --- Comment #1 from Nick Clifton nickc at redhat dot com --- Created attachment 7640 -- https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=7640action=edit Check for string values to DW_AT_MIPS_linkage_name -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ bug-binutils mailing list bug-binutils@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
[Bug binutils/16949] arm-none-eabi-objdump segfaults when disassembling ARM BE elf file
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16949 Nick Clifton nickc at redhat dot com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |WAITING --- Comment #2 from Nick Clifton nickc at redhat dot com --- Hi Andrey, Please try out the uploaded patch and let me know if it works for you. The problems appears to be that the binary contains bogus debug information. Specifically it has DW_AT_MIPS_linkage_name attributes that have a numeric value rather than a string value. This confuses the code that converts addressess into function names, since DW_AT_MIPS_linkage_name is supposed to contain a valid function name. Cheers Nick -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ bug-binutils mailing list bug-binutils@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
[Bug ld/16934] gc-sections fails to remove unused C++ member functions
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16934 Nick Clifton nickc at redhat dot com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |WAITING CC||nickc at redhat dot com --- Comment #4 from Nick Clifton nickc at redhat dot com --- Hi Curaga, What extraneous code is left in the executable ? Does the problem persist with the 2.24 relase or the current mainline development sources ? Cheers Nick -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ bug-binutils mailing list bug-binutils@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
[Bug binutils/16923] Windres with version overflow clobbers version number
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16923 Nick Clifton nickc at redhat dot com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED CC||nickc at redhat dot com Resolution|--- |FIXED --- Comment #2 from Nick Clifton nickc at redhat dot com --- Hi Anton, Thanks very much for pointing out this bug. I have applied the patch you suggested along with this changelog entry. Cheers Nick binutils/ChangeLog 2014-06-17 Anton Lavrentiwev l...@ncbi.nim.nih.gov PR binutils/16923 * rcparse.y (fixedverinfo): Prevent large version numbers from corrupting other values. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ bug-binutils mailing list bug-binutils@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
[Bug gas/16908] #line directives are ignored inside macros
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16908 Nick Clifton nickc at redhat dot com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED CC||nickc at redhat dot com Resolution|--- |FIXED --- Comment #3 from Nick Clifton nickc at redhat dot com --- Hi Chris, Thanks for the patch. I have applied it along with this changelog entry. Cheers Nick gas/ChangeLog 2014-06-17 Chris Metcalf cmetc...@tilera.com PR gas/16908 * macro.c (buffer_and_nest): Honour #line directives inside macros. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ bug-binutils mailing list bug-binutils@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
[Bug binutils/16847] processing branch instruction in .S might be wrong
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16847 Nick Clifton nickc at redhat dot com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||nickc at redhat dot com --- Comment #1 from Nick Clifton nickc at redhat dot com --- Hi Johnthan, binutils-2.15.97 This is a *very* old version of binutils. Please try a newer version, eg 2.24. Cheers Nick -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ bug-binutils mailing list bug-binutils@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
[Bug ld/16934] gc-sections fails to remove unused C++ member functions
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16934 --- Comment #6 from Nick Clifton nickc at redhat dot com --- Have you tried enabling link-time optimization in gcc. Ie compiling with -lfto added to the g++ command lines. This appears to work for the test case you supplied. The problem I believe is related to the virtual nature of the functions, which are not invoked directly, but rather via pointers stored in a table. The linker is not sophisticated enough to be able to determine which entries in a given table are unused, so it cannot delete the unneeded virtual functions. Cheers Nick -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ bug-binutils mailing list bug-binutils@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
[Bug ld/6962] ld fails in coffcode.h line 842 in handle_COMDAT
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=6962 --- Comment #8 from Nick Clifton nickc at redhat dot com --- Hi Shweta I am also getting the same error. You have given patch file. Can you please help me where to place this file and fix this bug? The patch file includes information about where it should be placed - in this case the file bfd/coffcode.h. But you should not need to apply it yourself - the patch has already been checked in to the binutils sources. Unless you are using an old set of the sources, in which case I would recommend upgrading to a newer set. Cheers Nick -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ bug-binutils mailing list bug-binutils@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
[Bug binutils/16949] arm-none-eabi-objdump segfaults when disassembling ARM BE elf file
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16949 Nick Clifton nickc at redhat dot com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|WAITING |RESOLVED Resolution|--- |FIXED --- Comment #5 from Nick Clifton nickc at redhat dot com --- Great - I have checked in the patch. Cheers Nick -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ bug-binutils mailing list bug-binutils@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
[Bug binutils/16698] BFD (GNU Binutils) 2.24 assertion fail elf32-arm.c:12387
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16698 --- Comment #10 from Nick Clifton nickc at redhat dot com --- Sorry - I still cannot reproduce this problem, even with the object file and library. :-( The external symbols that I am pulling in look the same as the ones you use: % readelf --syms ../../arm-eabi/libgcc/libgcc.a | grep uidiv 15: 0 FUNCGLOBAL HIDDEN 1 __aeabi_uidiv % readelf --syms ../../arm-eabi/newlib/libc.a | grep abort 15: 20 FUNCGLOBAL DEFAULT1 abort So I guess it must be a host-specific problem. Maybe you could run the link under GDB and find out some more about why the assert is being triggered ? Cheers Nick -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ bug-binutils mailing list bug-binutils@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
[Bug binutils/16698] BFD (GNU Binutils) 2.24 assertion fail elf32-arm.c:12387
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16698 --- Comment #16 from Nick Clifton nickc at redhat dot com --- ... and yet the testcase compiles and links without any problems: % make arm-linux-gnueabi-gcc -std=c99 -nostdinc -ffreestanding -g -fno-stack-protector -c -o libc/__libc_start_main.o libc/__libc_start_main.c arm-linux-gnueabi-gcc -std=c99 -nostdinc -ffreestanding -g -fno-stack-protector -c -o libc/exit.o libc/exit.c arm-linux-gnueabi-gcc -std=c99 -nostdinc -ffreestanding -g -fno-stack-protector -c -o libc/stdin.o libc/stdin.c rm -f libc.a arm-linux-gnueabi-ar rc libc.a libc/__libc_start_main.o libc/exit.o libc/stdin.o arm-linux-gnueabi-ranlib libc.a arm-linux-gnueabi-gcc -ffunction-sections -fdata-sections -s -g0 -c -o test.o test.c arm-linux-gnueabi-gcc -ffunction-sections -fdata-sections -s -g0 -c -o pcap.o pcap.c rm -f libtest1.a arm-linux-gnueabi-ar rc libtest1.a pcap.o arm-linux-gnueabi-ld -Bstatic -X -m armelf_linux_eabi -o test.elf -s crt/crt1.o crt/crti.o /arm-linux-gnueabi/libgcc/crtbeginT.o \ -L . -L /arm-linux-gnueabi/libgcc test.o --gc-sections -ltest1 --start-group -lgcc_eh -lgcc -lc --end-group \ --start-group -lgcc -lgcc_eh -lc --end-group /arm-linux-gnueabi/libgcc/crtend.o crt/crtn.o % What type of host machine are you using to build this test case ? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ bug-binutils mailing list bug-binutils@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
[Bug binutils/17113] Option to show whitespaces between textblocks
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17113 Nick Clifton nickc at redhat dot com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||nickc at redhat dot com --- Comment #1 from Nick Clifton nickc at redhat dot com --- Hi, That sounds a bit too complex. For example, how many non-printable characters should be displayed ? How many printable characters are needed before the display of non-printable characters is triggered. Etc. The strings command has been recently enhanced however so that it will now display all whitespace characters, including new-lines, if the --include-all-whitespace option is used. Perhaps this will help you ? Cheers Nick -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ bug-binutils mailing list bug-binutils@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
[Bug binutils/17113] Option to show whitespaces between textblocks
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17113 --- Comment #3 from Nick Clifton nickc at redhat dot com --- Hi, This sounds useful too and I will test it if this version is available on my distribution. But what do you think of my idea? Well it is certainly possible, and I can see how it could be useful in some situations. But unfortunately I do not have time to delve into implementing it at the moment. That should not stop anyone else from having a go however, and if you feel like writing a patch I will be happy to review it. Cheers Nick -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ bug-binutils mailing list bug-binutils@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
[Bug ld/17110] ld crash in _bfd_elf_find_segment_containing_section with -relax
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17110 Nick Clifton nickc at redhat dot com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||nickc at redhat dot com --- Comment #3 from Nick Clifton nickc at redhat dot com --- Created attachment 7690 -- https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=7690action=edit Do not look for output segments in input files. Hi Ryan, Please try out the uploaded patch and let me know if it works for you. Cheers Nick -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ bug-binutils mailing list bug-binutils@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
[Bug ld/16563] Corrupt .eh-frame section created when linking LTO and non-LTO objects
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16563 Nick Clifton nickc at redhat dot com changed: What|Removed |Added Attachment #7405|0 |1 is obsolete|| --- Comment #2 from Nick Clifton nickc at redhat dot com --- Created attachment 7743 -- https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=7743action=edit Second test case Second test case. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ bug-binutils mailing list bug-binutils@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
[Bug ld/16563] Corrupt .eh-frame section created when linking LTO and non-LTO objects
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16563 Nick Clifton nickc at redhat dot com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|--- |FIXED --- Comment #9 from Nick Clifton nickc at redhat dot com --- Hi Alan, Thanks for the patch - it does indeed solve the problem. I believe however that readelf is/was correct in saying the CIE pointer was invalid. These pointers are offsets into the .debug_frame section of the CIE entry to be used by the FDE that is being decoded. But the offsets can never be negative (ie pointing to before the start of .debug_frame), so readelf was correct to complain with this particular testcase. You are correct however in saying that readelf does have a potential bug - it will complain about FDEs that reference a CIE that is defined later on in the .debug_frame section. But I have never yet seen a binary that does this. When one turns up I will fix readelf. :-) Cheers Nick -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ bug-binutils mailing list bug-binutils@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
[Bug binutils/16698] BFD (GNU Binutils) 2.24 assertion fail elf32-arm.c:12387
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16698 --- Comment #21 from Nick Clifton nickc at redhat dot com --- I am sorry but this bug is just not reproducible with the FSF mainline binutils sources. :-( I can only conclude that the bug must be something to do with whatever patches CodeSourcery have applied to their toolchain. Nick -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ bug-binutils mailing list bug-binutils@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
[Bug ld/17288] sh64 incremental link does not set flags in ELF header
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17288 Nick Clifton nickc at redhat dot com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||nickc at redhat dot com --- Comment #4 from Nick Clifton nickc at redhat dot com --- Created attachment 7751 -- https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=7751action=edit Set SH5 flag in ELF header The uploaded patch fixes the problem, but I am not yet convinced that it is the correct solution. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ bug-binutils mailing list bug-binutils@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
[Bug binutils/17184] windres: Subtle incompatibility with Windows 8/8.1
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17184 Nick Clifton nickc at redhat dot com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||nickc at redhat dot com --- Comment #2 from Nick Clifton nickc at redhat dot com --- Hi Mity, MY recommendation - go with option 1 for now. If it works and noone else reports similar problems then all is well. If it works but then further problems show up then it would be worth investigating path 2. Cheers Nick -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ bug-binutils mailing list bug-binutils@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
[Bug ld/17196] .rsrc section from archive members are ignored (all Windows targets)
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17196 Nick Clifton nickc at redhat dot com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||nickc at redhat dot com --- Comment #1 from Nick Clifton nickc at redhat dot com --- Hi Benjamin, This is not a bug. It is a feature, or mis-feature if you prefer. The problem is that the resource.o file in the resource.a archive only contains a .rsrc section. It does not contain any symbols. The linker only pulls object files out of an archive if they contain symbols that are needed by other objects in the link. So when you link rsrcbug.o with resource.a there are no unresolved symbols in rsrcbug.o and so nothing is pulled out of the archive. There are a couple of possible workarounds for this problem: * You could like with --whole-archive added before resource.a. This will force the linker to include the resource.o file even though nothing references it. Ie: i686-pc-mingw32-gcc -m32 -mwin32 -mwindows -o rsrcbug-failed.exe \ -Wl,--whole-archive rsrcbug.o resource.a -Wl,--no-whole-archive Of course this does negate one of the benefits of using archives - namely that normally only the files that your program needs are extracted from the library. * You could add a symbol to resource.o and then reference this symbol from rsrcbug.o. See the uploaded variation on your test archive for an example of how this can be done. Cheers Nick -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ bug-binutils mailing list bug-binutils@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
[Bug ld/17196] .rsrc section from archive members are ignored (all Windows targets)
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17196 --- Comment #2 from Nick Clifton nickc at redhat dot com --- Created attachment 7759 -- https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=7759action=edit Modified test case that shows how to use a symbolic workaround -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ bug-binutils mailing list bug-binutils@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
[Bug ld/17212] Tag_CPU_name merging produces wrong tag.
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17212 Nick Clifton nickc at redhat dot com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED --- Comment #3 from Nick Clifton nickc at redhat dot com --- Hi Maxim, [Sorry for the delay in responding to this problem]. The simplest answer to your question is: yes, this is the expected behaviour. If you use a cortex-a8 targeted toolchain you will get a binary tagged with a cortex-a8 Tag_CPU_name. If you want a cortex-a15 tagged binary then use a cross toolchain specifically configured to target the cortex-a15. As Yuri pointed out, maybe we should be examining other tags when merging two architecture tags. But I suspect that this will open a can of worms that will prove to be too difficult to manage. Keep it simple is my advice. Use an a8 toolchain for creating a8 binaries and an a15 toolchain for creating a15 binaries. Cheers Nick -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ bug-binutils mailing list bug-binutils@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
[Bug binutils/17329] Error: PC relative branch to label foo which is not in the instruction space
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17329 --- Comment #4 from Nick Clifton nickc at redhat dot com --- Hi Thomas, Summary: it's the combination of an optimization flag (-O) with debugging symbols (-g) that fails. So, after all, maybe it's more a gcc issue than a binutils issue? Almost certainly. The bug is probably that gcc is generating a short version of a branch instruction (on instruction sequence) when it should be producing a long version instead. Probably because it has incorrectly calculated the lengths of the instructions between the source and destination of the branch. Cheers Nick -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ bug-binutils mailing list bug-binutils@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
[Bug ld/17369] The PF_X bit is set on PT_PHDR segment
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17369 Nick Clifton nickc at redhat dot com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||nickc at redhat dot com --- Comment #1 from Nick Clifton nickc at redhat dot com --- Hi H.J. Apparently this is for compatibility with UnixWare and Solaris. See bfd/elf.c:3849: /* FIXME: UnixWare and Solaris set PF_X, Irix 5 does not. */ m-p_flags = PF_R | PF_X; Is the execute bit causing you problems ? The ELF standard does not forbid it, so unless there is an actual issue that needs fixing I do not see any reason to change the current behaviour. Cheers Nick -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ bug-binutils mailing list bug-binutils@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
[Bug ld/17323] ld -r not generate cantunwind records in .ARM.exidx section
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17323 --- Comment #3 from Nick Clifton nickc at redhat dot com --- Created attachment 7792 -- https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=7792action=edit Proposed patch Hi Mikhail, Please try out this patch and let me know if it works for you. Cheers Nick -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ bug-binutils mailing list bug-binutils@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
[Bug ld/17323] ld -r not generate cantunwind records in .ARM.exidx section
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17323 Nick Clifton nickc at redhat dot com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ bug-binutils mailing list bug-binutils@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
[Bug ld/17321] add --enable-reloc-section option to generate proper relocation sections to .exes
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17321 Nick Clifton nickc at redhat dot com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||nickc at redhat dot com --- Comment #1 from Nick Clifton nickc at redhat dot com --- Hi Eriin, The patch is basically OK, ie acceptable, apart from a couple of small problems: 1. The changes to ld/emultempl/pep.em should refer to a variable called pep_dll_enable_reloc_section rather than pe_dll_enable_reloc_section, and this variable should be prototyped in ld/pep-dll.h and #define-d in ld/pep-dll.c. Try building a toolchain configure for an x86_64-pc-cygwin target to see why this is necessary. 2. The patch should include an update to ld/ld.texinfo describing the new command line option and when it should be used. 3. The patch needs a changelog entry, citing the author. You also need to make sure that the author has granted permission for this patch to be included in the binutils sources and he/she/it has assigned the copyright for the patch over to the FSF. With these changes I would be happy to accept the patches into the sources. Cheers Nick -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ bug-binutils mailing list bug-binutils@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
[Bug binutils/17510] strings: crash when given a truncated ELF
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17510 Nick Clifton nickc at redhat dot com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||nickc at redhat dot com --- Comment #4 from Nick Clifton nickc at redhat dot com --- Created attachment 7851 -- https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=7851action=edit Improve handling of corrupt section groups. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ bug-binutils mailing list bug-binutils@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
[Bug binutils/17510] strings: crash when given a truncated ELF
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17510 Nick Clifton nickc at redhat dot com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|--- |FIXED --- Comment #5 from Nick Clifton nickc at redhat dot com --- Hi Markus, I have applied a patch (also uploaded to this PR) to fix this problem. Please let me know if you find any more examples of corrupt binaries that can trigger this sort of problem. Cheers Nick -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ bug-binutils mailing list bug-binutils@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
[Bug binutils/17510] strings: crash when given a truncated ELF
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17510 --- Comment #6 from Nick Clifton nickc at redhat dot com --- oops - sorry, I meant Michal not Markus. Sorry Michal. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ bug-binutils mailing list bug-binutils@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
[Bug binutils/17512] segfault in PE parser / _bfd_pei_swap_aouthdr_in
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17512 Nick Clifton nickc at redhat dot com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||nickc at redhat dot com --- Comment #3 from Nick Clifton nickc at redhat dot com --- Created attachment 7852 -- https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=7852action=edit Handle corrupt values for NumberOfRvaAndSizes field Hi Hanno, I have applied the uploaded patch to the mainline sources. Please try it out and see if it resolves the problem for you. Cheers Nick -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ bug-binutils mailing list bug-binutils@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
