[Bug ld/23935] [Regression] ld.bfd does not rescan fat LTO archives to resolve plugin-added references

2024-03-26 Thread hjl.tools at gmail dot com
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23935 H.J. Lu changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|NEW

[Bug ld/23935] [Regression] ld.bfd does not rescan fat LTO archives to resolve plugin-added references

2024-03-26 Thread cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23935 --- Comment #12 from Sourceware Commits --- The master branch has been updated by H.J. Lu : https://sourceware.org/git/gitweb.cgi?p=binutils-gdb.git;h=bb9a951fab7a30cc1209c6b8b1716c13456e8b1a commit bb9a951fab7a30cc1209c6b8b1716c13456e8b1a

[Bug ld/23935] [Regression] ld.bfd does not rescan fat LTO archives to resolve plugin-added references

2024-03-25 Thread sam at gentoo dot org
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23935 Sam James changed: What|Removed |Added See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill

[Bug ld/23935] [Regression] ld.bfd does not rescan fat LTO archives to resolve plugin-added references

2024-03-25 Thread sam at gentoo dot org
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23935 Sam James changed: What|Removed |Added See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill

[Bug ld/23935] [Regression] ld.bfd does not rescan fat LTO archives to resolve plugin-added references

2024-03-15 Thread sam at gentoo dot org
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23935 Sam James changed: What|Removed |Added CC||sam at gentoo dot org -- You are

[Bug ld/23935] [Regression] ld.bfd does not rescan fat LTO archives to resolve plugin-added references

2018-12-10 Thread vlad at ispras dot ru
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23935 --- Comment #11 from Vladislav Ivanishin --- (In reply to H.J. Lu from comment #10) > Please try: > > https://sourceware.org/ml/binutils/2018-12/msg00112.html Works for me. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list

[Bug ld/23935] [Regression] ld.bfd does not rescan fat LTO archives to resolve plugin-added references

2018-12-07 Thread hjl.tools at gmail dot com
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23935 H.J. Lu changed: What|Removed |Added Status|WAITING |NEW --- Comment #10 from H.J. Lu ---

[Bug ld/23935] [Regression] ld.bfd does not rescan fat LTO archives to resolve plugin-added references

2018-12-07 Thread vlad at ispras dot ru
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23935 --- Comment #9 from Vladislav Ivanishin --- > --- Comment #8 from H.J. Lu --- > Please try users/hjl/lto-mixed/master branch with > > commit 08c2f8679f999afaf59d9bc378ef2ff51ed5f40f > Author: H.J. Lu > Date: Thu Dec 6 11:45:41 2018 -0800

[Bug ld/23935] [Regression] ld.bfd does not rescan fat LTO archives to resolve plugin-added references

2018-12-06 Thread hjl.tools at gmail dot com
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23935 H.J. Lu changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING Last reconfirmed|

[Bug ld/23935] [Regression] ld.bfd does not rescan fat LTO archives to resolve plugin-added references

2018-12-03 Thread vlad at ispras dot ru
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23935 --- Comment #7 from Vladislav Ivanishin --- (In reply to H.J. Lu from comment #6) > The behaviors of with and without -ffat-lto-objects should be the same. > Either both work or both don't. Why? I think the behavior of 'with

[Bug ld/23935] [Regression] ld.bfd does not rescan fat LTO archives to resolve plugin-added references

2018-12-03 Thread hjl.tools at gmail dot com
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23935 --- Comment #6 from H.J. Lu --- The behaviors of with and without -ffat-lto-objects should be the same. Either both work or both don't. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

[Bug ld/23935] [Regression] ld.bfd does not rescan fat LTO archives to resolve plugin-added references

2018-12-03 Thread vlad at ispras dot ru
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23935 --- Comment #5 from Vladislav Ivanishin --- (In reply to H.J. Lu from comment #4) > (In reply to Vladislav Ivanishin from comment #3) > > GCC does not tell it needs the printf symbol, because it's a builtin > > function > > (prog.c is

[Bug ld/23935] [Regression] ld.bfd does not rescan fat LTO archives to resolve plugin-added references

2018-12-03 Thread hjl.tools at gmail dot com
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23935 --- Comment #4 from H.J. Lu --- (In reply to Vladislav Ivanishin from comment #3) > GCC does not tell it needs the printf symbol, because it's a builtin function > (prog.c is compiled without -fno-builtin). > Although printf is a builtin

[Bug ld/23935] [Regression] ld.bfd does not rescan fat LTO archives to resolve plugin-added references

2018-12-03 Thread amonakov at gmail dot com
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23935 Alexander Monakov changed: What|Removed |Added CC||amonakov at gmail dot com --

[Bug ld/23935] [Regression] ld.bfd does not rescan fat LTO archives to resolve plugin-added references

2018-12-03 Thread vlad at ispras dot ru
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23935 Vladislav Ivanishin changed: What|Removed |Added Status|RESOLVED|UNCONFIRMED

[Bug ld/23935] [Regression] ld.bfd does not rescan fat LTO archives to resolve plugin-added references

2018-11-30 Thread hjl.tools at gmail dot com
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23935 H.J. Lu changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED CC|

[Bug ld/23935] [Regression] ld.bfd does not rescan fat LTO archives to resolve plugin-added references

2018-11-30 Thread vlad at ispras dot ru
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23935 Vladislav Ivanishin changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|ld.bfd does not rescan fat |[Regression] ld.bfd does