[Bug ld/6931] COMDAT group is broken

2008-10-02 Thread amodra at bigpond dot net dot au
-- What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|unassigned at sources dot |amodra at bigpond dot net |redhat dot com |dot au

[Bug ld/6931] COMDAT group is broken

2008-10-02 Thread amodra at bigpond dot net dot au
--- Additional Comments From amodra at bigpond dot net dot au 2008-10-02 14:42 --- Testing a fix. I know now why I hacked the group signature into the SEC_GROUP name... -- What|Removed |Added

[Bug gas/6926] Macro number feature \@ conflicting with @ in line_separator_chars

2008-10-02 Thread nickc at redhat dot com
--- Additional Comments From nickc at redhat dot com 2008-10-02 16:58 --- Created an attachment (id=2978) -- (http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=2978action=view) Allow escaped end of line characters -- http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=6926 --- You

[Bug gas/6926] Macro number feature \@ conflicting with @ in line_separator_chars

2008-10-02 Thread nickc at redhat dot com
--- Additional Comments From nickc at redhat dot com 2008-10-02 17:01 --- Hi Hans-Peter, The problem it seems to me is that we are not allowing escaped end-of-line characters. Please could you try out the uploaded patch which I think will address the problem. I was not sure if we

[Bug ld/6938] ld: failure depending on order of -l libs

2008-10-02 Thread brian at dessent dot net
--- Additional Comments From brian at dessent dot net 2008-10-02 22:26 --- Subject: Re: New: ld: failure depending on order of -l libs What is the bug? The order is significant by design. -- http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=6938 --- You are receiving this mail

[Bug gas/6926] Macro number feature \@ conflicting with @ in line_separator_chars

2008-10-02 Thread hp at sourceware dot org
--- Additional Comments From hp at sourceware dot org 2008-10-03 00:04 --- While I do think tc_allow_escaped_end_of_line is overkill and being overcautious that the canonical escape sequence won't fly, the patch certainly works for me. Thanks for fixing this so very promtly! (I would

[Bug ld/6938] ld: failure depending on order of -l libs

2008-10-02 Thread dmitry at karasik dot eu dot org
--- Additional Comments From dmitry at karasik dot eu dot org 2008-10-03 05:11 --- Uhm. I didn't know that it is significant by design. Well if it is, then I guess there's no bug and you may as well close the ticket. However, may I ask for links for further reading? I can't find