Re: /usr/bin/ld: Please report this bug.

2006-04-13 Thread Alan Modra
On Wed, Apr 12, 2006 at 08:54:19PM -0400, Greg Martyn wrote:
> Hi,
> Just doing what the program told me to. Could be that my school's
> server had some corruption.. other things were acting strange too.
> This happened while compiling gcc 4.0.3.
> 
> 
> /usr/bin/ld: BFD 2.14.90.0.4 20030523 internal error, aborting at
> ../../bfd/elf32-i386.c line 2377 in elf_i386_relocate_section

Update your binutils.  2.14 is by now very old, and is not a good match
for gcc-4.x.  Bugs tend to be exposed..

-- 
Alan Modra
IBM OzLabs - Linux Technology Centre


___
bug-binutils mailing list
bug-binutils@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils


[Bug gas/2539] avr-as generates wrong opcode for call/jmp with lables

2006-04-13 Thread nickc at redhat dot com

--- Additional Comments From nickc at redhat dot com  2006-04-13 09:15 
---
Hi Mack,

  This is not a bug, but a feature.  The AVR assembler has chosen to use a reloc
with the JMP instruction, so the actual address is not resolved until link time.
 If you disassemble the object file with -Dr instead of -D you will see:

   :
   0:   0c 94 00 00 jmp 0   ; 0x0 
0: R_AVR_CALL   .text+0x46
  
etc.  The reason for this is that the JMP instruction takes an absolute address
as its operand, and this address cannot be known until the linker has assigned a
location to the .text section.

The RJMP and RCALL instructions on the other hand take PC-relative operands, so
their values can be computed by the assembler at assembly time.  Hence these two
instructions do not generate relocs.

Cheers
  Nick


-- 
   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |RESOLVED
 Resolution||INVALID


http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=2539

--- 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


Re: /usr/bin/ld: Please report this bug.

2006-04-13 Thread Greg Martyn
On 4/13/06, Alan Modra <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Update your binutils.  2.14 is by now very old, and is not a good match
> for gcc-4.x.  Bugs tend to be exposed..

Thanks. I'll try bugging the admin about it.

-Greg Martyn


___
bug-binutils mailing list
bug-binutils@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils


[Bug gas/2533] Internal error

2006-04-13 Thread hjl at lucon dot org

--- Additional Comments From hjl at lucon dot org  2006-04-14 01:03 ---
Please provide a complete testcase so that we can reproduce it.

-- 
   What|Removed |Added

 CC||hjl at lucon dot org
 Status|NEW |WAITING


http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=2533

--- 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