https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31726
Nick Clifton changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||nickc at redhat dot com
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31395
Nick Clifton changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||nickc at redhat dot com
--- Comment
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31738
--- Comment #4 from Nick Clifton ---
(In reply to Pali Rohár from comment #3)
> Anyway, how to run that one exclude-symbols-def-i386.d test case?
I build the binutils for the i686-pc-mingw32 target and then run the linker
tests. That
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31738
Nick Clifton changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31728
Nick Clifton changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||nickc at redhat dot com
--- Comment
||nickc at redhat dot com
Resolution|--- |FIXED
--- Comment #2 from Nick Clifton ---
Hi Tom,
Thanks for pointing this out. It turns out there are quite a few
warning messages in that source file that are missing a terminating
\n character
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31714
--- Comment #3 from Nick Clifton ---
Created attachment 15510
--> https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=15510=edit
script for performing binary searches on the binutils git repository
--
You are receiving this mail because:
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31714
Nick Clifton changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||nickc at redhat dot com
--- Comment
|RESOLVED
CC||nickc at redhat dot com
--- Comment #2 from Nick Clifton ---
Hi Roberto,
Thanks for reporting this issue. The problem was a bug in a macro used to
process relocations against global symbols. This macro assumed
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30783
Nick Clifton changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30783
--- Comment #7 from Nick Clifton ---
Created attachment 15481
--> https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=15481=edit
Proposed patch
Hi Achim,
Thanks for the uploaded file. I think that I now understand the problem.
Please
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31609
Nick Clifton changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||nickc at redhat dot com
--- Comment
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30743
Nick Clifton changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30743
Nick Clifton changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #15467|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31540
--- Comment #9 from Nick Clifton ---
Hi Alan,
> https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31540
>
> --- Comment #8 from Alan Modra ---
> Nick, your change to binutils/testsuite/binutils-all/pr25662.ld results in
> arc-elf +FAIL:
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30743
Nick Clifton changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #15461|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31255
--- Comment #4 from Nick Clifton ---
I have updated the example in the assembler documentation to make it clear that
the .altmacro pseudo-op is affecting the invocation of the macro, not the
definition.
--
You are receiving this mail
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31527
--- Comment #19 from Nick Clifton ---
Oops - I missed that too. Sorry.
Patch applied as commit: ab0a395b54d
Cheers
Nick
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31527
Nick Clifton changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|REOPENED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31540
Nick Clifton changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
||nickc at redhat dot com
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Last reconfirmed||2024-04-15
Assignee|unassigned at sourceware dot org |nickc at redhat dot com
--- Comment #3 from Nick Clifton ---
(In reply to vijay Shankar
|unassigned at sourceware dot org |nickc at redhat dot com
Resolution|--- |FIXED
CC||nickc at redhat dot com
--- Comment #2 from Nick Clifton ---
Hi Seanga,
Thanks for reporting this problem.
I have checked in a small
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30730
Nick Clifton changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||nickc at redhat dot com
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30743
--- Comment #2 from Nick Clifton ---
Created attachment 15461
--> https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=15461=edit
Proposed patch
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30743
Nick Clifton changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||nickc at redhat dot com
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31527
--- Comment #13 from Nick Clifton ---
(In reply to Simon Cook from comment #12)
Hi Simon,
> Patch with my suggested change, and done some testing pre-the previous fix
> and with my change and verified UNC paths still work. (Tested using ld
>
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31527
Nick Clifton changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED
Resolution|FIXED
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31571
Nick Clifton changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||nickc at redhat dot com
--- Comment
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31605
Nick Clifton changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||nickc at redhat dot com
--- Comment
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31595
--- Comment #4 from Nick Clifton ---
(In reply to Victor Do Nascimento from comment #3)
Hi Victor,
> Looking at `readelf -S ./libc.so.6', we see that the crash happens within
> the .gnu.hash section of the elf file. This, combined with the
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31527
--- Comment #4 from Nick Clifton ---
(In reply to Zhiqing Xiong from comment #3)
> does this change will be released in GDB 15.1 ?
Yes. Or maybe 14.3. I am not sure of the number of the next GDB release...
--
You are receiving this mail
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31595
Nick Clifton changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at sourceware dot org |victorldn at sourceware
dot
|--- |FIXED
CC||nickc at redhat dot com
--- Comment #2 from Nick Clifton ---
Hi Zhiqing,
Thank you for reporting this issue and providing a solution.
I have applied your patch to the sources. I am a little bit concerned
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31595
Nick Clifton changed:
What|Removed |Added
Version|unspecified |2.43 (HEAD)
--
You are receiving
: normal
Priority: P2
Component: binutils
Assignee: unassigned at sourceware dot org
Reporter: nickc at redhat dot com
Target Milestone: ---
Attempting to disassemble the latest version of glibc compiled for the AArch64
for Fedora Rawhide results
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31445
Nick Clifton changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||nickc at redhat dot com
Last
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31473
Nick Clifton changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||nickc at redhat dot com
--- Comment
|unassigned at sourceware dot org |nickc at redhat dot com
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Ever confirmed|0 |1
CC||nickc at redhat dot com
--- Comment #1 from Nick Clifton ---
(In reply to Domenico
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31469
Nick Clifton changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||nickc at redhat dot com
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31457
Nick Clifton changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||nickc at redhat dot com
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31456
Nick Clifton changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
|1
Assignee|unassigned at sourceware dot org |nickc at redhat dot com
CC||nickc at redhat dot com
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list
at sourceware dot org |nickc at redhat dot com
CC||nickc at redhat dot com
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
--- Comment #2 from Nick Clifton ---
Thanks for reporting this bug.
The issue was that the uncompressed section size
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31327
--- Comment #4 from Nick Clifton ---
(In reply to Sam James from comment #2)
> OK, I get what's happening here.
>
> This ended up being
> https://github.com/ianlancetaylor/libbacktrace/issues/118 which is fixed
> upstream.
>
> Nick, or
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31000
Nick Clifton changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||nickc at redhat dot com
--- Comment
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31384
Nick Clifton changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||nickc at redhat dot com
--- Comment
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31250
Nick Clifton changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31250
--- Comment #6 from Nick Clifton ---
(In reply to Amyspark from comment #4)
> Applied the patch on top of mingw-w64-binutils (commit
> c2aee7d89488d9402315d59d25852dff258c9eba), and can confirm it works as
> expected.
OK, that is good news.
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31277
Nick Clifton changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||nickc at redhat dot com
--- Comment
||nickc at redhat dot com
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed||2024-01-25
--- Comment #2 from Nick Clifton ---
Hi Amyspark,
Is the library really valid if it contains absolute pathnames ?
Ie, wouldn't
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31250
--- Comment #3 from Nick Clifton ---
Created attachment 15332
--> https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=15332=edit
Proposed patch
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
||nickc at redhat dot com
Resolution|--- |FIXED
--- Comment #1 from Nick Clifton ---
Fixed by commit: 6aadf8a04d162feb2afe3c41f5b36534d661d447
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30824
--- Comment #6 from Nick Clifton ---
Hi Alan,
(In reply to Alan Modra from comment #5)
> Created attachment 15305 [details]
> increase relr alignment requirement
>
> untested
That patch does work. At least as far as building FreeRDP goes.
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30824
--- Comment #3 from Nick Clifton ---
Created attachment 15304
--> https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=15304=edit
Proposed patch
I am not sure if this will help, but the uploaded patch allows the link to
succeed.
I am not a
|RESOLVED
CC||nickc at redhat dot com
--- Comment #2 from Nick Clifton ---
Hi Dilyan,
Thanks for reporting this problem.
I have checked in a small patch to change nm's --help output along the lines
that you suggested.
Cheers
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30824
Nick Clifton changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||nickc at redhat dot com
--- Comment
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30703
--- Comment #17 from Nick Clifton ---
(In reply to Pete Moore from comment #16)
> If a 2.41.1 release is undesirable, another option could be to add a comment
> to the release notes of 2.41 to specify that makeinfo version 6.8 or higher
> is
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=27217
Nick Clifton changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|REOPENED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31228
Nick Clifton changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||nickc at redhat dot com
|--- |NOTABUG
CC||nickc at redhat dot com
--- Comment #4 from Nick Clifton ---
(In reply to Marcin Godlewski from comment #2 and #3)
> Does it mean -zseparate-code is enabled by default in x86-64, but not in
> aarch64?
> Or is
||nickc at redhat dot com
Resolution|--- |NOTABUG
--- Comment #1 from Nick Clifton ---
(In reply to 时宇羽然 from comment #0)
> Hi, I found a memory leak bug in the source code of binutils, and I have
> shown
> the execution sequence below.
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31115
--- Comment #5 from Nick Clifton ---
(In reply to Thiago Jung Bauermann from comment #4)
Hi Thiago,
> $ gcc -g -o pr25124 ~/src/binutils-gdb/gdb/testsuite/gdb.arch/pr25124.S
> $ gdb pr25124
> Reading symbols from pr25124...
> (gdb) x/i main
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31134
Nick Clifton changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||nickc at redhat dot com
--- Comment
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31115
--- Comment #3 from Nick Clifton ---
Hi THiago,
(In reply to Thiago Jung Bauermann from comment #2)
> Thank you for the quick response! I tested the patch, but unfortunately the
> DIE still has the LSB bit set in DW_AT_low_pc, and GDB still
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31115
--- Comment #1 from Nick Clifton ---
Created attachment 15240
--> https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=15240=edit
Proposed patch
Hi Thiago,
Please could you try out this patch and let me know if it works for you ?
Cheers
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31115
Nick Clifton changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at sourceware dot org |nickc at redhat dot com
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31106
--- Comment #12 from Nick Clifton ---
(In reply to Stas Sergeev from comment #11)
> OK, I checked that the new binary
> works as expected.
Ok, I will check in the patch.
> If that's the problem, then I'd suggest
> no not touch relocations
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31106
--- Comment #10 from Nick Clifton ---
Hi Stas,
(In reply to Stas Sergeev from comment #8)
> Hi, it would be easier if you just
> provide the newly stripped binary.
OK, I have uploaded a copy.
> Have you considered to spare the
>
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31106
--- Comment #9 from Nick Clifton ---
Created attachment 15237
--> https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=15237=edit
Stripped file
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31106
--- Comment #7 from Nick Clifton ---
Created attachment 15236
--> https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=15236=edit
Proposed patch
Hi Stas,
Please can you try out this patch ?
The issue is that the relocation processing
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31106
--- Comment #5 from Nick Clifton ---
Addendum: It may not be the effect of stripping that causes this behaviour.
Just copying the file using objcopy also shows the same effect:
$ objcopy fdppkrnl.35.10.elf test.elf
$ readelf -r
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31106
Nick Clifton changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at sourceware dot org |nickc at redhat dot com
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31106
Nick Clifton changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||nickc at redhat dot com
--- Comment
|unassigned at sourceware dot org |nickc at redhat dot com
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Last reconfirmed||2023-12-04
--- Comment #3 from Nick Clifton ---
(In reply to Nicolas Schier from comment #2)
> thanks for the insights and explanations, I
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31105
Nick Clifton changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31105
Nick Clifton changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||nickc at redhat dot com
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31096
Nick Clifton changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||nickc at redhat dot com
--- Comment
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31067
--- Comment #6 from Nick Clifton ---
(In reply to Richard Earnshaw from comment #4)
> But your patch talks about SYMBOL being defined. The two are quite
> different, so which is correct?
*sigh* The NEWS file is correct.
I was obviously
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31067
Nick Clifton changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31067
Nick Clifton changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at sourceware dot org |nickc at redhat dot com
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31077
Nick Clifton changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||nickc at redhat dot com
--- Comment
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28910
Nick Clifton changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|REOPENED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31062
Nick Clifton changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|NEW
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31062
Nick Clifton changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #15220|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31062
--- Comment #6 from Nick Clifton ---
Created attachment 15220
--> https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=15220=edit
Proposed patch
Hi Andreas,
Is this patch what you had in mind ?
It adds a -Z/--decompress command line
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28910
--- Comment #23 from Nick Clifton ---
OK, I have applied the patch.
I have a suspicion that the problem may exist for other long-format command
line options, so I am not going to close this PR just yet. I need to do some
more testing
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31062
Nick Clifton changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||nickc at redhat dot com
--- Comment
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28910
Nick Clifton changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED
Resolution|FIXED
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28910
--- Comment #19 from Nick Clifton ---
Created attachment 15218
--> https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=15218=edit
Proposed patch
Hi Jan,
Please could you try out this supplemental patch ?
Cheers
Nick
--
You are
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30880
--- Comment #6 from Nick Clifton ---
(In reply to Vsevolod Alekseyev from comment #5)
> Thanks. The change to configure was intentional but wasn't meant to make it
> into the commit. Is there a built-in way to rebuild readelf with -O0, short
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30880
Nick Clifton changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||nickc at redhat dot com
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30930
Nick Clifton changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30865
Nick Clifton changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30722
--- Comment #14 from Nick Clifton ---
(In reply to Jan Beulich from comment #13)
> While I can't say it has become entirely clear to me, it looks as if our
> testcase expectations, to some degree, depend on properties of the
> underlying
|--- |NOTABUG
CC||nickc at redhat dot com
--- Comment #1 from Nick Clifton ---
Hi Jan,
(In reply to Jan Engelhardt from comment #0)
> The GNU info page for GAS from binutils-2.40 specifies in section 7.85
> (".s
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=27565
--- Comment #15 from Nick Clifton ---
(In reply to Eric Botcazou from comment #14)
> There is a "may" missing in the NEWS blurb.
Doh! So there is. I have pushed a simple commit to add the missing word.
--
You are receiving this mail
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=27565
Nick Clifton changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31009
--- Comment #8 from Nick Clifton ---
Hi Jonny,
(In reply to Jonny Weir from comment #3)
> > Are you able to attach a debugger to the linker and discover the values that
> > are triggering this assertion ? The code looks like this:
>
> I
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31009
Nick Clifton changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||nickc at redhat dot com
--- Comment
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=27565
Nick Clifton changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #15180|0 |1
is obsolete|
1 - 100 of 3682 matches
Mail list logo
