[Touch-packages] [Bug 1843394] Re: FTBFS in Eoan - Error: operand type mismatch for `push' - gcc 9.2.1 / binutils 2.32.51.20190905-0ubuntu1

2019-10-08 Thread Launchpad Bug Tracker
This bug was fixed in the package binutils - 2.33-1ubuntu1 --- binutils (2.33-1ubuntu1) eoan; urgency=medium * Don't generate control file entries for any native mips* packages. binutils (2.33-1) unstable; urgency=medium * Binutils 2.33 release (taken from the binutils-2_33

[Touch-packages] [Bug 1843394] Re: FTBFS in Eoan - Error: operand type mismatch for `push' - gcc 9.2.1 / binutils 2.32.51.20190905-0ubuntu1

2019-10-08 Thread Christian Ehrhardt 
Now after we have understood it we know the fix is actually in binutils. Furthermore any other third party code (or even a few other FTBFS in Eoan) could be due to that. IMHO that is a high prio to fix before Eoan as it would not be a new bug bur a regression. I'll set it as critical, but it is

[Touch-packages] [Bug 1843394] Re: FTBFS in Eoan - Error: operand type mismatch for `push' - gcc 9.2.1 / binutils 2.32.51.20190905-0ubuntu1

2019-10-05 Thread Bug Watch Updater
** Changed in: binutils Status: Confirmed => Fix Released -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to binutils in Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1843394 Title: FTBFS in Eoan - Error: operand type

[Touch-packages] [Bug 1843394] Re: FTBFS in Eoan - Error: operand type mismatch for `push' - gcc 9.2.1 / binutils 2.32.51.20190905-0ubuntu1

2019-09-20 Thread Lucas Kanashiro
** Changed in: ipxe (Ubuntu) Status: New => Triaged ** Changed in: ipxe (Ubuntu) Importance: Undecided => High ** Tags added: server-next ** Changed in: ipxe (Ubuntu) Assignee: (unassigned) => Christian Ehrhardt  (paelzer) -- You received this bug notification because you are

[Touch-packages] [Bug 1843394] Re: FTBFS in Eoan - Error: operand type mismatch for `push' - gcc 9.2.1 / binutils 2.32.51.20190905-0ubuntu1

2019-09-19 Thread Bug Watch Updater
** Changed in: binutils Status: New => Confirmed -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to binutils in Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1843394 Title: FTBFS in Eoan - Error: operand type mismatch for

[Touch-packages] [Bug 1843394] Re: FTBFS in Eoan - Error: operand type mismatch for `push' - gcc 9.2.1 / binutils 2.32.51.20190905-0ubuntu1

2019-09-19 Thread Christian Ehrhardt 
Working build with V2 at https://launchpad.net/~paelzer/+archive/ubuntu/bug-1843394-ipxe-ftbfs -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to binutils in Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1843394 Title: FTBFS in

[Touch-packages] [Bug 1843394] Re: FTBFS in Eoan - Error: operand type mismatch for `push' - gcc 9.2.1 / binutils 2.32.51.20190905-0ubuntu1

2019-09-19 Thread Christian Ehrhardt 
FYI: feedback indicates this is intentional and we'd need to change IPXE. My experiments showed that the initial idea isn't good, I'll submit a V2 to IPXE on the thread already linked here. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Touch seeded packages, which is

[Touch-packages] [Bug 1843394] Re: FTBFS in Eoan - Error: operand type mismatch for `push' - gcc 9.2.1 / binutils 2.32.51.20190905-0ubuntu1

2019-09-18 Thread Bug Watch Updater
Launchpad has imported 1 comments from the remote bug at https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25012. If you reply to an imported comment from within Launchpad, your comment will be sent to the remote bug automatically. Read more about Launchpad's inter-bugtracker facilities at

[Touch-packages] [Bug 1843394] Re: FTBFS in Eoan - Error: operand type mismatch for `push' - gcc 9.2.1 / binutils 2.32.51.20190905-0ubuntu1

2019-09-18 Thread Christian Ehrhardt 
FYI reported upstream: https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25012 and linked in this bug. ** Bug watch added: Sourceware.org Bugzilla #25012 https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25012 ** Also affects: binutils via https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25012

[Touch-packages] [Bug 1843394] Re: FTBFS in Eoan - Error: operand type mismatch for `push' - gcc 9.2.1 / binutils 2.32.51.20190905-0ubuntu1

2019-09-17 Thread Christian Ehrhardt 
Note: given that this went into the archive in early July and that nothing but this section in IPXE broke I lean toward assuming that the ipxe code is broken or at least (while it worked in the past) not implemented the way it should be for the assembly to work. Yet I'm not feeling experienced

[Touch-packages] [Bug 1843394] Re: FTBFS in Eoan - Error: operand type mismatch for `push' - gcc 9.2.1 / binutils 2.32.51.20190905-0ubuntu1

2019-09-13 Thread Christian Ehrhardt 
Summary D vs E: - no suffix => works equally in both releases => same opcodes in all .code segments - suffix "w" => works equally in both releases => opcodes in .code32/.code64 differ from .code16 (660f..) => .code16 matches the non-suffix opcodes (0f..) - suffix "l" => failures in

[Touch-packages] [Bug 1843394] Re: FTBFS in Eoan - Error: operand type mismatch for `push' - gcc 9.2.1 / binutils 2.32.51.20190905-0ubuntu1

2019-09-13 Thread Christian Ehrhardt 
Result Disco: ### Testing suffix '' ### .code16 push %gs push %fs pop %gs pop %fs .code32 push %gs push %fs pop %gs pop %fs .code64 push %gs push %fs pop %gs pop %fs push.out: file format elf64-x86-64 Disassembly of section .text: <.text>: 0: 0f a8

[Touch-packages] [Bug 1843394] Re: FTBFS in Eoan - Error: operand type mismatch for `push' - gcc 9.2.1 / binutils 2.32.51.20190905-0ubuntu1

2019-09-13 Thread Christian Ehrhardt 
Result Eoan: ### Testing suffix '' ### .code16 push %gs push %fs pop %gs pop %fs .code32 push %gs push %fs pop %gs pop %fs .code64 push %gs push %fs pop %gs pop %fs push.out: file format elf64-x86-64 Disassembly of section .text: <.text>: 0: 0f a8

[Touch-packages] [Bug 1843394] Re: FTBFS in Eoan - Error: operand type mismatch for `push' - gcc 9.2.1 / binutils 2.32.51.20190905-0ubuntu1

2019-09-13 Thread Christian Ehrhardt 
Slightly extending on that test by Valentine I really think this is a change in binutils behavior. Attaching a script to test which I then will add logs from Disco (older 2.32) and Eoan (2.32.51). The script does: - test pop/push with suffixes "" w l q - test this in code 16/32/64 blocks **

[Touch-packages] [Bug 1843394] Re: FTBFS in Eoan - Error: operand type mismatch for `push' - gcc 9.2.1 / binutils 2.32.51.20190905-0ubuntu1

2019-09-12 Thread Christian Ehrhardt 
Quoting a post of a ipxe related developer that did a nice check realizing that e.g. disassembly always lists pushq (and opcode stays the same) - thanks to Valentine for these checks!: AFAIU, segment registers are 16-bit long, however, "pushl" and "pushq" should also be valid and produce the

[Touch-packages] [Bug 1843394] Re: FTBFS in Eoan - Error: operand type mismatch for `push' - gcc 9.2.1 / binutils 2.32.51.20190905-0ubuntu1

2019-09-12 Thread Christian Ehrhardt 
FYI: The comparison to Fedora (there it still works) uses binutils 2.31.1-29.fc30.x86_64 still. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to binutils in Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1843394 Title: FTBFS in

[Touch-packages] [Bug 1843394] Re: FTBFS in Eoan - Error: operand type mismatch for `push' - gcc 9.2.1 / binutils 2.32.51.20190905-0ubuntu1

2019-09-12 Thread Matthias Klose
** Tags added: ftbfs -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to binutils in Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1843394 Title: FTBFS in Eoan - Error: operand type mismatch for `push' - gcc 9.2.1 / binutils