Launchpad has imported 6 comments from the remote bug at
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=544358.
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
https://help
Could a "project maintainer or bug supervisor" please change the Fedora
bug status from "In Progress" to "Fix Released" or authorize me to do
so?
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/461303
T
Could a "project maintainer or bug supervisor" please change the MinGW
bug status from "In Progress" to "Fix Released" or authorize me to do
so?
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/461303
Ti
Launchpad has imported 14 comments from the remote bug at
http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=10856.
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
https://h
binutils 2.20.1, released 2010-03-03, does *not* have the ChangeLog
entry from http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=10856#c5 but
*does* have the patch to expr.c. Weird. But I guess it is fixed in
binutils 2.20.1.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
B
Fixed in MingW's upgrade to binutils 2.20.51.20100613
** Changed in: mingw
Importance: Unknown => Undecided
** Changed in: mingw
Status: Unknown => New
** Changed in: mingw
Remote watch: SourceForge.net Tracker #2913876 => None
** Changed in: mingw
Status: New => Fix Released
** Changed in: pycryptopp
Status: Unknown => Fix Released
--
generates-bad-code regression
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/461303
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
--
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubunt
** Bug watch added: SourceForge.net Tracker #2913876
http://sourceforge.net/support/tracker.php?aid=2913876
** Also affects: mingw via
http://sourceforge.net/support/tracker.php?aid=2913876
Importance: Unknown
Status: Unknown
** Also affects: pycryptopp via
http://allmydata.org
** Changed in: binutils (Fedora)
Status: Unknown => In Progress
--
generates-bad-code regression
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/461303
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
--
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@lists
** Bug watch added: Red Hat Bugzilla #544358
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=544358
** Also affects: binutils (Fedora) via
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=544358
Importance: Unknown
Status: Unknown
--
generates-bad-code regression
https://bugs.launchpad.ne
** Changed in: tahoe-lafs
Status: New => Fix Released
--
generates-bad-code regression
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/461303
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
--
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.co
** Changed in: tahoe-lafs
Status: Unknown => New
--
generates-bad-code regression
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/461303
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
--
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com
htt
Confirmed on the pycryptopp buildbot: binutils 2.20-0ubuntu1:
http://allmydata.org/buildbot-pycryptopp/builders/linux-amd64-ubuntu-
karmic-yukyuk/builds/16 , 2.20-0ubuntu2: http://allmydata.org/buildbot-
pycryptopp/builders/linux-amd64-ubuntu-karmic-yukyuk/builds/17
--
generates-bad-code regressi
** Tags added: verification-done
** Tags removed: verification-needed
** Changed in: binutils (Ubuntu)
Status: Fix Committed => Fix Released
** Changed in: binutils (Ubuntu)
Milestone: karmic-updates => None
--
generates-bad-code regression
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/461303
You
the updated package builds libcrypto++, same fix for lucid is in
2.20-1ubuntu1, now in lucid.
--
generates-bad-code regression
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/461303
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
--
ubuntu-bugs mailing
** Changed in: binutils
Status: Unknown => Fix Released
--
generates-bad-code regression
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/461303
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
--
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.
Accepted binutils into karmic-proposed, the package will build now and
be available in a few hours. Please test and give feedback here. See
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Testing/EnableProposed for documentation how to
enable and use -proposed. Thank you in advance!
** Tags added: verification-needed
--
I reviewed the package in -proposed. Will accept right after karmic
release.
What is the test case here? libcrypto++ failing the tests (and build) in
karmic final, and succeeding with the proposed update?
** Changed in: binutils (Ubuntu Karmic)
Status: In Progress => Fix Committed
** Chan
** Changed in: libcrypto++ (Ubuntu Karmic)
Status: New => Invalid
** Changed in: binutils (Ubuntu Karmic)
Milestone: None => karmic-updates
--
generates-bad-code regression
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/461303
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bug
** Changed in: binutils (Ubuntu Karmic)
Status: Confirmed => In Progress
--
generates-bad-code regression
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/461303
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
--
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-b
** Also affects: binutils (Ubuntu Karmic)
Importance: Medium
Status: Confirmed
** Also affects: libcrypto++ (Ubuntu Karmic)
Importance: Undecided
Status: New
--
generates-bad-code regression
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/461303
You received this bug notification because you
** Bug watch added: Sourceware.org Bugzilla #10856
http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=10856
** Also affects: binutils via
http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=10856
Importance: Unknown
Status: Unknown
** Changed in: binutils (Ubuntu)
Importance: Undecided
On 27.10.2009 16:44, Zooko O'Whielacronx wrote:
> Wei Dai, the author of Crypto++, has kindly volunteered to investigate:
> http://groups.google.com/group/cryptopp-users/msg/e49e6e8a0adf4630
did you identify the patch causing the failure?
> He asks:
>
> "How can we find out who submitted the the
Please also see my response where I say that I don't know where the
patches come from and where I speculate about blacklisting this
particular version of GNU assembler:
http://groups.google.com/group/cryptopp-users/msg/fef83f2a64c797cc
--
generates-bad-code regression
https://bugs.launchpad.net/
Wei Dai, the author of Crypto++, has kindly volunteered to investigate:
http://groups.google.com/group/cryptopp-users/msg/e49e6e8a0adf4630
He asks:
"How can we find out who submitted the the binutil patch and contact him
or her?"
--
generates-bad-code regression
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/
I posted to the Crypto++ mailing list asking for help and warning them not to
upgrade to Karmic:
http://groups.google.com/group/cryptopp-users/browse_thread/thread/36ceee8e8f500fd3
--
generates-bad-code regression
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/461303
You received this bug notification because
okay, i'm not at all familiar with binutils, but just studying which
files were changed by this patch and excluding build, packaging,
translation, and non-amd64 arches, i am left with these three patches:
--- binutils-2.19.91.20091006/gas/read.c2009-09-15 13:27:21.0
+0100
+++ binu
note that libcrypto++ does include a fair bit of asm code for amd64.
--
generates-bad-code regression
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/461303
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
--
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@lists.u
http://launchpadlibrarian.net/33666914/binutils_2.19.91.20091006-0ubuntu1_2.19.91.20091014-0ubuntu1.diff.gz
(linked from
https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/binutils/2.19.91.20091014-0ubuntu1)
--
generates-bad-code regression
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/461303
You received this bug notifica
** Package changed: gcc-4.4 (Ubuntu) => binutils (Ubuntu)
--
generates-bad-code regression
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/461303
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
--
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com
h
Preparing to replace binutils 2.19.91.20091006-0ubuntu1 (using
binutils_2.19.91.20091014-0ubuntu1_amd64.deb) ...
Yep. 2.19.91.20091014-0ubuntu1 builds a libcrypto++8 that hangs during
the SHA validation in its self-tests. What's the next step? How can we
get a diff from 2.19.91.20091006-0ubuntu
Preparing to replace binutils 2.19.91.20091005-0ubuntu2 (using
binutils_2.19.91.20091006-0ubuntu1_amd64.deb) ...
Okay it passed. This implies that the upgrade from
2.19.91.20091006-0ubuntu1 to 2.19.91.20091014-0ubuntu1 introduced this
regression. I'll just double-check that 2.19.91.20091014-0ubu
okay 2.19.91.20091005-0ubuntu2 built it correctly. We must be getting
close to the regressing version. Next I'll try
2.19.91.20091006-0ubuntu1 .
--
generates-bad-code regression
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/461303
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, wh
Okay, 2.19.91.20091003-0ubuntu1 passed. So the regression must be
between 2.19.91.20091003-0ubuntu1 and 2.19.91.20091014-0ubuntu1 . Next
I will try 2.19.91.20091005-0ubuntu2 .
--
generates-bad-code regression
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/461303
You received this bug notification because you
Oh by the way this is all on amd64.
--
generates-bad-code regression
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/461303
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
--
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.co
Okay, the result is that 2.19.91.20091014-0ubuntu1 also misbuilds
libcrypto++8.
Next I will try the point halfway between the last known good version
(2.19.91.20090910-0ubuntu1) and the earliest known bad version
(2.19.91.20091014-0ubuntu1). That would be... 2.19.91.20091003-0ubuntu1
. And while
Okay I just did this:
Preparing to replace binutils 2.19.91.20090910-0ubuntu1 (using
binutils_2.19.91.20091014-0ubuntu1_amd64.deb) ...
And am now pbuilding again. Now we'll see if the regression happened
between 2.19.91.20090910-0ubuntu1 and 2.19.91.20091014-0ubuntu1 or
between 2.19.91.20091014-
Okay it looks like this is an issue in binutils, not in g++. As stated
in the previous comment I installed the version of g++-4.4 and all of
its many dependencies that had been used back in 2009-09-18 to build
libcrypto++8, and the build still fails. Then I changed binutils from
the current (2.20
Hold on, the reason that I stated that g++ 4.4.1-3ubuntu3 built good
code is as follows:
1. The resulting libcrypto++8 is in Karmic, so it must have passed its
self-test which happens automatically when you build it, right?
2. If you link pycryptopp to the resulting libcrypto++8 which is in
Kar
** Bug watch added: allmydata.org/trac/pycryptopp/ #31
http://allmydata.org/trac/pycryptopp/ticket/31
** Also affects: tahoe-lafs via
http://allmydata.org/trac/pycryptopp/ticket/31
Importance: Unknown
Status: Unknown
--
generates-bad-code regression
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bug
** Package changed: ubuntu => gcc-4.4 (Ubuntu)
** Tags added: regression-potential
--
generates-bad-code regression
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/461303
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
--
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubun
41 matches
Mail list logo
