[Bug gas/949] No relocation overflow error for 14 bit immediate values
--- Additional Comments From hodaniel at student dot ethz dot ch 2005-05-26 10:48 --- It's ok for me now that I know the reasons behind this. Thanks for the patch! -- What|Removed |Added Status|WAITING |RESOLVED Resolution||WORKSFORME http://sources.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=949 --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ bug-binutils mailing list bug-binutils@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
[Bug gas/669] Macro Expansion is broken
--- Additional Comments From mcvick_e at iname dot com 2005-05-26 14:58 --- The .set notation works well enough. Just had to change massive amounts of assembly (existing code) to work within the new constraints. -- What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution||FIXED http://sources.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=669 --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ bug-binutils mailing list bug-binutils@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
[Bug binutils/973] New: BFD internal error in bfd_cache_lookup_worker
"BFD: BFD 2.15.93 20041018 internal error, aborting at cache.c line 495 in bfd_cache_lookup_worker" I got the above error while executing "quit" from gdb, and was asked to report it. My binutils version is 2.15.92.0.2 as installed by my distribution (gentoo). This is an amd64 system; binutils is built to only support 64bit targets. The gdb session was somewhat long running; I had run 'make' from within gdb multiple times, and then re-ran my program each time. -- Summary: BFD internal error in bfd_cache_lookup_worker Product: binutils Version: 2.15 Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: P2 Component: binutils AssignedTo: unassigned at sources dot redhat dot com ReportedBy: tfogal at apollo dot sr dot unh dot edu CC: bug-binutils at gnu dot org GCC build triplet: x86_64-pc-linux-gnu GCC host triplet: x86_64-pc-linux-gnu GCC target triplet: x86_64-pc-linux-gnu http://sources.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=973 --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ bug-binutils mailing list bug-binutils@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
[Bug binutils/973] BFD internal error in bfd_cache_lookup_worker
--- Additional Comments From tfogal at apollo dot sr dot unh dot edu 2005-05-26 20:09 --- Created an attachment (id=498) --> (http://sources.redhat.com/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=498&action=view) log of gdb session and error Sorry, my terminal is not set to have much memory and thus I could not get the entire log. Gdb was open for much longer 'above' the script, doing more of the same. -- http://sources.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=973 --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ bug-binutils mailing list bug-binutils@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
[Bug binutils/971] ranlib: unable to copy file 'XX' reason: Permission denied
--- Additional Comments From woodd at deshaw dot com 2005-05-26 23:35 --- (In reply to comment #1) > Hmm. BSD archive maps contain a timestamp. I'd expect ranlib to update this > timestamp whenever you run ranlib on an archive, regardless of whether the map > changed or not. This is in fact how GNU ranlib operates, which means you > always > need write access to the archive. Yes, I see what you mean. In this case, checking write permission on the library is the prudent thing to do. Sorry for wasting your time on this :-/. David -- What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution||WONTFIX http://sources.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=971 --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ bug-binutils mailing list bug-binutils@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
[Bug binutils/973] BFD internal error in bfd_cache_lookup_worker
--- Additional Comments From amodra at bigpond dot net dot au 2005-05-27 00:00 --- Looks like a dup of http://sources.redhat.com/cgi-bin/gnatsweb.pl?cmd=view%20audit-trail&database=gdb&pr=1945 I would suspect a bug in gdb, ie. gdb using BFD incorrectly, rather than a bug in BFD itself. In any case, this bug report should go to the gdb people. -- What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |SUSPENDED http://sources.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=973 --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ bug-binutils mailing list bug-binutils@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
