[Bug binutils/4888] [regression] objcopy -R .debug_* --only-keep-debug broken

2007-08-03 Thread hjl at lucon dot org
-- What|Removed |Added CC||hjl at lucon dot org http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=4888 --- You are receiving this mail

[Bug binutils/4888] [regression] objcopy -R .debug_* --only-keep-debug broken

2007-08-03 Thread doko at debian dot org
--- Additional Comments From doko at debian dot org 2007-08-03 09:45 --- omitting -R .debug_aranges avoids the garbled symbols -- http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=4888 --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are

Re: gas for itanium: ia64-ic.tbl: dependency bug due to error in the itanium specification

2007-08-03 Thread Jim Wilson
On Thu, 2007-08-02 at 14:18 +0200, Lars wrote: in the group 'fp-non-arith', xma is listed, but not xmpy. hence simply adding also xmpy there will do the trick. This is correct. This is a bug in the Intel documentation. HJ, can you report this internally within Intel to get the docs fixed?

[Bug binutils/4888] [regression] objcopy -R .debug_* --only-keep-debug broken

2007-08-03 Thread hjl at lucon dot org
--- Additional Comments From hjl at lucon dot org 2007-08-04 01:54 --- This patch http://sourceware.org/ml/binutils-cvs/2007-05/msg00158.html causes this regression. Alan, I couldn't find where it was discussed. Can you look into it? Thanks. -- What|Removed

[Bug binutils/4791] etc/standards.texi: @strong{Note...} produces a spurious cross-reference in Info

2007-08-03 Thread nightstrike at gmail dot com
--- Additional Comments From nightstrike at gmail dot com 2007-08-04 02:55 --- I have reviewed the current version of the standards.texi file. Should this bug report be the one that requests updating to the latest version of gnustandards, or is that in the project plan for binutils