[Bug admin/10785] memory access violation in bfd/opncls.c
--- Additional Comments From amodra at bigpond dot net dot au 2009-10-16 07:10 --- Well, peicode.h alloc was OK until http://sourceware.org/ml/binutils/2009-07/msg00255.html came along :-( -- http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=10785 --- 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/10636] x86-64 assembler misassemble 32bit absolute address
--- Additional Comments From vapier at gentoo dot org 2009-10-16 06:45 --- so i guess it's expected that openssl will no longer assemble with this change ? make[3]: Entering directory `/var/tmp/portage/dev-libs/openssl-0.9.8k-r1/work/openssl-0.9.8k/crypto/md5' x86_64-pc-linux-gnu-gcc -I.. -I../.. -I../../include -fPIC -DOPENSSL_PIC -DZLIB -DOPENSSL_THREADS -D_REENTRANT -DDSO_DLFCN -DHAVE_DLFCN_H -DL_ENDIAN -DTERMIO -Wall -DMD32_REG_T=int -DOPENSSL_BN_ASM_MONT -DSHA1_ASM -DSHA256_ASM -DSHA512_ASM -DMD5_ASM -DAES_ASM -O2 -march=k8 -pipe -g -Wimplicit-function-declaration -Wa,--noexecstack -c -o md5-x86_64.o md5-x86_64.s md5-x86_64.s: Assembler messages: md5-x86_64.s:41: Error: 0xd76aa478 out range of signed 32bit displacement md5-x86_64.s:50: Error: 0xe8c7b756 out range of signed 32bit displacement md5-x86_64.s:68: Error: 0xc1bdceee out range of signed 32bit displacement md5-x86_64.s:77: Error: 0xf57c0faf out range of signed 32bit displacement . 41:leal3614090360(%rax,%r10,1),%eax 50:leal3905402710(%rdx,%r10,1),%edx 68:leal3250441966(%rbx,%r10,1),%ebx 77:leal4118548399(%rax,%r10,1),%eax -- What|Removed |Added CC||toolchain at gentoo dot org http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=10636 --- 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 admin/10785] memory access violation in bfd/opncls.c
--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-16 07:15 --- Subject: Bug 10785 CVSROOT:/cvs/src Module name:src Changes by: amo...@sourceware.org 2009-10-16 07:14:44 Modified files: bfd: ChangeLog opncls.c coff-alpha.c peicode.h Log message: PR binutils/10785 * coff-alpha.c (alpha_ecoff_get_elt_at_filepos): Don't bfd_alloc bim and bim->buffer. bfd_malloc instead. * peicode.h (pe_ILF_build_a_bfd): Similarly. (ILF_DATA_SIZE): Don't include bim. * opncls.c (bfd_close): Test bim->buffer non-NULL before freeing. Patches: http://sources.redhat.com/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/src/bfd/ChangeLog.diff?cvsroot=src&r1=1.4815&r2=1.4816 http://sources.redhat.com/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/src/bfd/opncls.c.diff?cvsroot=src&r1=1.58&r2=1.59 http://sources.redhat.com/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/src/bfd/coff-alpha.c.diff?cvsroot=src&r1=1.40&r2=1.41 http://sources.redhat.com/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/src/bfd/peicode.h.diff?cvsroot=src&r1=1.60&r2=1.61 -- http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=10785 --- 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/10785] memory access violation in bfd/opncls.c
--- Additional Comments From amodra at bigpond dot net dot au 2009-10-16 07:51 --- Fixed -- What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Component|admin |binutils Resolution||FIXED http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=10785 --- 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/10785] memory access violation in bfd/opncls.c
--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-16 10:03 --- Subject: Bug 10785 CVSROOT:/cvs/src Module name:src Branch: binutils-2_20-branch Changes by: ging...@sourceware.org 2009-10-16 10:02:44 Modified files: bfd: ChangeLog coff-alpha.c opncls.c peicode.h Log message: 2009-10-16 Alan Modra PR binutils/10785 * coff-alpha.c (alpha_ecoff_get_elt_at_filepos): Don't bfd_alloc bim and bim->buffer. bfd_malloc instead. * peicode.h (pe_ILF_build_a_bfd): Similarly. (ILF_DATA_SIZE): Don't include bim. * opncls.c (bfd_close): Test bim->buffer non-NULL before freeing. Patches: http://sources.redhat.com/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/src/bfd/ChangeLog.diff?cvsroot=src&only_with_tag=binutils-2_20-branch&r1=1.4761.2.25&r2=1.4761.2.26 http://sources.redhat.com/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/src/bfd/coff-alpha.c.diff?cvsroot=src&only_with_tag=binutils-2_20-branch&r1=1.40&r2=1.40.6.1 http://sources.redhat.com/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/src/bfd/opncls.c.diff?cvsroot=src&only_with_tag=binutils-2_20-branch&r1=1.57.2.1&r2=1.57.2.2 http://sources.redhat.com/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/src/bfd/peicode.h.diff?cvsroot=src&only_with_tag=binutils-2_20-branch&r1=1.59.2.1&r2=1.59.2.2 -- http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=10785 --- 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/10636] x86-64 assembler misassemble 32bit absolute address
--- Additional Comments From hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2009-10-16 13:35 --- (In reply to comment #3) > so i guess it's expected that openssl will no longer assemble with this > change ? > > 41:leal3614090360(%rax,%r10,1),%eax > 50:leal3905402710(%rdx,%r10,1),%edx > 68:leal3250441966(%rbx,%r10,1),%ebx > 77:leal4118548399(%rax,%r10,1),%eax These displacements can't be encoded with signed 32bit integers. -- http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=10636 --- 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/10768] dlltool: selecting machine arch when creating .lib from .def file failed with unclear error message
--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-16 14:03 --- Subject: Bug 10768 CVSROOT:/cvs/src Module name:src Changes by: ni...@sourceware.org2009-10-16 14:02:55 Modified files: binutils : ChangeLog dlltool.c Log message: PR 10768 * dlltool.c (bfd_get_errmsg): New macro. (scan_obj_file): Use it. (make_one_lib_file): Use it. (make_head): Use it. (make_delay_head): Use it. (make_tail): Use it. (gen_lib_file): Use it. (identify_dll_for_implib): Use it. (identify_search_archive): Use it. Patches: http://sources.redhat.com/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/src/binutils/ChangeLog.diff?cvsroot=src&r1=1.1546&r2=1.1547 http://sources.redhat.com/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/src/binutils/dlltool.c.diff?cvsroot=src&r1=1.93&r2=1.94 -- http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=10768 --- 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/10768] dlltool: selecting machine arch when creating .lib from .def file failed with unclear error message
--- Additional Comments From nickc at redhat dot com 2009-10-16 14:03 --- Hi Yann, Thanks for the patch. I have now applied it to the sources along with this changelog entry. Cheers Nick binutils/ChangeLog 2009-10-16 Yann Droneaud PR 10768 * dlltool.c (bfd_get_errmsg): New macro. (scan_obj_file): Use it. (make_one_lib_file): Use it. (make_head): Use it. (make_delay_head): Use it. (make_tail): Use it. (gen_lib_file): Use it. (identify_dll_for_implib): Use it. (identify_search_archive): Use it. -- What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution||FIXED http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=10768 --- 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/10764] compiler option added after operands
--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-16 14:09 --- Subject: Bug 10764 CVSROOT:/cvs/src Module name:src Changes by: ni...@sourceware.org2009-10-16 14:08:58 Modified files: binutils : ChangeLog Makefile.am Makefile.in Log message: PR 10764 * Makefile.am (sysinfo.o, syslex.o): Place source file after all command line switches. * Makefile.in: Regenerate. Patches: http://sources.redhat.com/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/src/binutils/ChangeLog.diff?cvsroot=src&r1=1.1547&r2=1.1548 http://sources.redhat.com/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/src/binutils/Makefile.am.diff?cvsroot=src&r1=1.119&r2=1.120 http://sources.redhat.com/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/src/binutils/Makefile.in.diff?cvsroot=src&r1=1.140&r2=1.141 -- http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=10764 --- 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/10764] compiler option added after operands
--- Additional Comments From nickc at redhat dot com 2009-10-16 14:09 --- Hi Jerker, Thanks for reporting this problem and for providing a patch. I have checked it in along with the following changelog entry. Cheers Nick binutils/ChangeLog 2009-10-16 Jerker Bäck PR 10764 * Makefile.am (sysinfo.o, syslex.o): Place source file after all command line switches. * Makefile.in: Regenerate. -- What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution||FIXED http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=10764 --- 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/10636] x86-64 assembler misassemble 32bit absolute address
--- Additional Comments From vapier at gentoo dot org 2009-10-16 15:11 --- thanks, just wanted to make sure the issue was with the assembly code i'm not terribly great with x86 assembly. could you suggest a fix ? every statement that is failing (44 of them) are exactly the same form but a different constant. -- http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=10636 --- 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 ld/9790] LD's "export everything" logic problematic
--- Additional Comments From nickc at redhat dot com 2009-10-16 15:20 --- Hi Dmitry, Thanks for the patch - I have applied it along with an addition to the ld/NEWS file mentioning the new feature and the ld/ld.texinfo file describing the new command line option. Cheers Nick -- What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution||FIXED http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=9790 --- 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/10636] x86-64 assembler misassemble 32bit absolute address
--- Additional Comments From hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2009-10-16 15:36 --- (In reply to comment #5) > thanks, just wanted to make sure the issue was with the assembly code > > i'm not terribly great with x86 assembly. could you suggest a fix ? every > statement that is failing (44 of them) are exactly the same form but a > different > constant. First verify if they really should be negative values. If yes, change them to negative values. If no, rewrite them. -- http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=10636 --- 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/10636] x86-64 assembler misassemble 32bit absolute address
--- Additional Comments From vapier at gentoo dot org 2009-10-16 16:19 --- i'm pretty sure they should all be unsigned -- http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=10636 --- 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/10775] x86 64 documentation addenda
--- Additional Comments From hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2009-10-16
16:30 ---
(In reply to comment #0)
> The following information is lacking from the GAS manual:
>
> In node (as.info)i386-Mnemonics, add at the end of 9.13.4,
>
> In 64-bit mode, `movabs' is the form of the mov instruction which loads
> a 64-bit literal into a register.
>
movabs is not the only form to load a 64-bit literal into a register.
I don't think we want to go into such details here.
> The AT&T/Unixware assembler is documented at
> http://docs.sun.com/app/docs/doc/802-1948?l=en&q=assembler+manual and
> http://docs.sun.com/app/docs/doc/817-5477?l=en.
>
> In node (as.info)i386-Regs, before "* the 8 debug registers:" add
> * The processor control register `%cr8'.
>
> At the end of that node, add
>
> The 80386 flags register is not supported as a distinct register. Instead,
> the
> instructions `PUSH [ER]?FLAGS' and `POP [EA]?FLAGS' are encoded as
> `pushf[wlq]'
> and `popf[wlq]'.
I don't think this belongs here. People should consult SDM when
writing assembly code.
> After node (as.info)i386-16bit, add a new section:
>
> 9.13.13 Writing 64-bit Code
> ---
> The `.code64' directive causes the assembler to emit AMD64 ``long mode''
> (64-bit) code. As mentioned above, the `.code32' directive switches to 32-bit
> code. Which mode the assembler is in originally depends on the --32 and --64
> options.
I will check in this patch.
diff --git a/gas/doc/c-i386.texi b/gas/doc/c-i386.texi
index cf0bfa8..50e6e98 100644
--- a/gas/doc/c-i386.texi
+++ b/gas/doc/c-i386.texi
@@ -513,6 +513,9 @@ the 4 8-bit registers: @samp{%sil}, @samp{%dil}, @samp{%bpl}
, @samp{%spl}.
the 8 debug registers: @samp{%db8...@samp{%db15}.
@item
+the 8 control registers: @samp{%cr8...@samp{%cr15}.
+
+...@item
the 8 SSE registers: @samp{%xmm8...@samp{%xmm15}.
@end itemize
@@ -812,8 +815,9 @@ or 64-bit x86-64 code depending on the default configuration
,
it also supports writing code to run in real mode or in 16-bit protected
mode code segments. To do this, put a @samp{.code16} or
@samp{.code16gcc} directive before the assembly language instructions to
-be run in 16-bit mode. You can switch @co...@value{as}} back to writing
-normal 32-bit code with the @samp{.code32} directive.
+be run in 16-bit mode. You can switch @co...@value{as}} to writing
+32-bit code with the @samp{.code32} directive or 64-bit code with the
+...@samp{.code64} directive.
@samp{.code16gcc} provides experimental support for generating 16-bit
code from gcc, and differs from @samp{.code16} in that @samp{call},
--
http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=10775
--- 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/10775] x86 64 documentation addenda
--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-16 16:33 --- Subject: Bug 10775 CVSROOT:/cvs/src Module name:src Changes by: h...@sourceware.org 2009-10-16 16:33:17 Modified files: gas: ChangeLog gas/doc: c-i386.texi Log message: 2009-10-16 H.J. Lu PR gas/10775 * doc/c-i386.texi: Mention the 8 extra control registers for x86-64. Mention .code64 directive. Patches: http://sources.redhat.com/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/src/gas/ChangeLog.diff?cvsroot=src&r1=1.3987&r2=1.3988 http://sources.redhat.com/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/src/gas/doc/c-i386.texi.diff?cvsroot=src&r1=1.38&r2=1.39 -- http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=10775 --- 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/10636] x86-64 assembler misassemble 32bit absolute address
--- Additional Comments From hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2009-10-16 16:39 --- (In reply to comment #7) > i'm pretty sure they should all be unsigned How does code work since hardware treats them as signed for calculation? -- http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=10636 --- 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/10775] x86 64 documentation addenda
--- Additional Comments From hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2009-10-16 16:55 --- Fixed. -- What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution||FIXED http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=10775 --- 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/10767] opcodes/i386-dis.c exceeds 256 levels of nested macros
--- Additional Comments From hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2009-10-16 17:57 --- Fixed. -- What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution||FIXED http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=10767 --- 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/10785] memory access violation in bfd/opncls.c
--- Additional Comments From jerker dot back at gmail dot com 2009-10-16 20:29 --- Problem gone in both 64bit and 32bit builds Thanks -- http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=10785 --- 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/10792] New: variable declare inside code block in binutils/dlltool.c
variable declared inside code block.
Not all compilers are happy about it
===
RCS file: /cvs/src/src/binutils/dlltool.c,v
retrieving revision 1.93
diff -w -b -B -u -p -r1.93 dlltool.c
--- dlltool.c 4 Sep 2009 01:22:18 - 1.93
+++ dlltool.c 16 Oct 2009 20:36:00 -
@@ -3162,13 +3162,14 @@ gen_lib_file (int delay)
static void
dll_name_list_append (dll_name_list_type * list, bfd_byte * data)
{
+ dll_name_list_node_type * entry;
+
/* Error checking. */
if (! list || ! list->tail)
return;
/* Allocate new node. */
- dll_name_list_node_type * entry =
-(dll_name_list_node_type *) xmalloc (sizeof (dll_name_list_node_type));
+ entry = (dll_name_list_node_type *) xmalloc (sizeof
(dll_name_list_node_type));
/* Initialize its values. */
entry->dllname = xstrdup ((char *) data);
@@ -3184,12 +3185,14 @@ dll_name_list_append (dll_name_list_type
static int
dll_name_list_count (dll_name_list_type * list)
{
+ dll_name_list_node_type * p;
+ int count = 0;
+
/* Error checking. */
if (! list || ! list->head)
return 0;
- int count = 0;
- dll_name_list_node_type * p = list->head;
+ p = list->head;
while (p && p->next)
{
@@ -3204,11 +3207,13 @@ dll_name_list_count (dll_name_list_type
static void
dll_name_list_print (dll_name_list_type * list)
{
+ dll_name_list_node_type * p;
+
/* Error checking. */
if (! list || ! list->head)
return;
- dll_name_list_node_type * p = list->head;
+ p = list->head;
while (p && p->next && p->next->dllname && *(p->next->dllname))
{
--
Summary: variable declare inside code block in binutils/dlltool.c
Product: binutils
Version: 2.21 (HEAD)
Status: NEW
Severity: normal
Priority: P2
Component: binutils
AssignedTo: unassigned at sources dot redhat dot com
ReportedBy: jerker dot back at gmail dot com
CC: bug-binutils at gnu dot org
GCC build triplet: x86_64-unknown-interix6.1
GCC host triplet: x86_64-unknown-interix6.1
GCC target triplet: x86_64-unknown-interix6.1
http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=10792
--- 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/9933] `strip --strip-unneeded` strips common symbols from relocatable objects
--- Additional Comments From vincent dot riviere at freesbee dot fr 2009-10-16 20:58 --- The new testcase copy-4 fails on target m68k-netbsd (using a.out). The test seems to be valid, maybe the fix didn't work for a.out objects. -- http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=9933 --- 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/10793] New: gcc cant get pass unused code in binutils/prdbg.c
I can't get Interix gcc 3.3 get pass this due to warning settings
(info is unused)
The solution it's a bit ugly, my gcc knowledge could be better.
Maybe you can come up with something more elegant?
===
RCS file: /cvs/src/src/binutils/prdbg.c,v
retrieving revision 1.23
diff -w -b -B -u -p -r1.23 prdbg.c
--- prdbg.c 10 Sep 2009 13:40:44 - 1.23
+++ prdbg.c 16 Oct 2009 20:36:01 -
@@ -2088,8 +2088,8 @@ tg_struct_field (void *p, const char *na
static bfd_boolean
tg_end_struct_type (void *p ATTRIBUTE_UNUSED)
{
- struct pr_handle *info = (struct pr_handle *) p;
- assert (info->stack != NULL);
+ assert(((struct pr_handle *)p)->stack != NULL);
return TRUE;
}
--
Summary: gcc cant get pass unused code in binutils/prdbg.c
Product: binutils
Version: 2.21 (HEAD)
Status: NEW
Severity: minor
Priority: P2
Component: binutils
AssignedTo: unassigned at sources dot redhat dot com
ReportedBy: jerker dot back at gmail dot com
CC: bug-binutils at gnu dot org
GCC build triplet: x86_64-unknown-interix6.1
GCC host triplet: x86_64-unknown-interix6.1
GCC target triplet: x86_64-unknown-interix6.1
http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=10793
--- 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/9933] `strip --strip-unneeded` strips common symbols from relocatable objects
-- What|Removed |Added CC||vincent dot riviere at ||freesbee dot fr http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=9933 --- 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/10636] x86-64 assembler misassemble 32bit absolute address
--- Additional Comments From vapier at gentoo dot org 2009-10-16 21:41 --- i have no idea. i'm not an openssl expert let alone x86 assembly. guess i'll just file a bug report upstream and let them handle it. -- http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=10636 --- 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
binutils-2.20 gas arm-linux compilation bug
FYI, in compiling gas with binutils-2.20, I get the following error,
which then aborts the build:
gcc -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -I../../gas -I. -I../../gas -I../bfd
-I../../gas/config -I../../gas/../include -I../../gas/..
-I../../gas/../bfd
-DLOCALEDIR="\"//opt/ltrx/ixp42x/host/usr/share/locale\"" -W -Wall
-Wstrict-prototypes -Wmissing-prototypes -Werror -g -O2 -MT tc-arm.o -MD
-MP -MF .deps/tc-arm.Tpo -c -o tc-arm.o `test -f 'config/tc-arm.c' ||
echo '../../gas/'`config/tc-arm.c
cc1: warnings being treated as errors
../../gas/config/tc-arm.c: In function 'make_mapping_symbol':
../../gas/config/tc-arm.c:2489: warning: empty body in an if-statement
I've configured with:
mkdir arm-linux
cd arm-linux
../configure \
--target=arm-linux \
--prefix=%{LTRX_HOST_DIR}/usr \
--with-lib-path=%{LTRX_HOST_DIR}/lib
I don't get this error at all in binutils-2.19. (Yes, it still does a
-Werror, however).
I'm not sure what the proper fix for this is. But apparently there's
been significant changes to the tc-arm.c file between the two revs.
___
bug-binutils mailing list
bug-binutils@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
