[Bug ld/19623] regression: missing relocation for symbols in discarded section
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19623 Nick Clifton changed: What|Removed |Added CC||nickc at redhat dot com --- Comment #1 from Nick Clifton --- Hi Leon, > b) the call to _bfd_clear_contents seems to be undesirable in my SCO scenario This intrigues me, and I suspect is the core of the problem. Do you have any idea as to why this should make a difference ? On the surface the purpose seems clear: the reloc being cleared references a section that is going to be discarded. so there is no point in processing, or retaining, the reloc. > Unfortunately I cannot provide you with the object files I am linking > because they are proprietary but If you are really need a test case, I might > be able to to program a minimal test case which reflects my problem. Please do try - I think that we are going to need one. If we are going to have to make an SCO specific patch, (which is undesirable, but appears to be the case in this situation), then we will need a way to make sure that it works, and that it does not break other COFF targets. Cheers Nick -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ bug-binutils mailing list bug-binutils@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
[Bug ld/19516] microblaze: invalid symbol indices in GLOB_DAT relocs
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19516 --- Comment #3 from cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org --- The master branch has been updated by Nick Clifton : https://sourceware.org/git/gitweb.cgi?p=binutils-gdb.git;h=47993b4af18c6ef1cad300f6393bf896d3cb5e5c commit 47993b4af18c6ef1cad300f6393bf896d3cb5e5c Author: Rich Felker Date: Tue Feb 23 10:37:24 2016 + Fix the genetation of GOT entries for the Microblaze target. PR target/19516 * elf32-microblaze.c (microblaze_elf_finish_dynamic_symbol): Always produce a RELATIVE reloc for a local symbol. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ bug-binutils mailing list bug-binutils@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
[Bug ld/19516] microblaze: invalid symbol indices in GLOB_DAT relocs
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19516 Nick Clifton changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED CC||nickc at redhat dot com Resolution|--- |FIXED --- Comment #4 from Nick Clifton --- Hi Rich, Thanks for reporting and fixing this problem. :-) I have checked in your patch along with this changelog entry. Cheers Nick bfd/ChangeLog 2016-02-23 Rich Felker PR target/19516 * elf32-microblaze.c (microblaze_elf_finish_dynamic_symbol): Always produce a RELATIVE reloc for a local symbol. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ bug-binutils mailing list bug-binutils@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
[Bug ld/19480] [2.26.51 regression] ld creates wrong output for libstdc++6.dll for mingw32 (32-bit)
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19480 Nick Clifton changed: What|Removed |Added CC||nickc at redhat dot com --- Comment #2 from Nick Clifton --- Does adding -Wl,--no-gc-sections act as a workaround ? (Instead of reverting the COFF gc patch, as suggested by Stephen). -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ bug-binutils mailing list bug-binutils@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
Bunutils bug report
Welcome, Today i wanted to compile https://github.com/dcid/rootcheck/, but i can't because "/usr/bin/ld" have error during copilation. I have Debian wheezy md5 sum of /usr/bin/ld: 9d191aa4c02fddb867fe303a622175af error log: Making monitord cc -g -Wall -I../ -I../headers -DDEFAULTDIR=\"/tmp/rootcheck\" -DUSE_OPENSSL -DARGV0=\"ossec-monitord\" -DXML_VAR=\"var\" -DOSSECHIDS compress_log.c main.c manage_files.c monitor_agents.c monitord.c sign_log.c generate_reports.c ../os_maild/sendcustomemail.c ../config/lib_config.a ../shared/lib_shared.a ../os_net/os_net.a ../os_regex/os_regex.a ../os_xml/os_xml.a ../os_crypto/os_crypto.a ../os_zlib/os_zlib.c ../external/libz.a -o ossec-monitord /usr/bin/ld: BFD (GNU Binutils for Debian) 2.22 internal error, aborting at ../../bfd/reloc.c line 443 in bfd_get_reloc_size /usr/bin/ld: Please report this bug. collect2: error: ld returned 1 exit status make: *** [mmonitor] Error 1 Error Making monitord regards Rexikon___ bug-binutils mailing list bug-binutils@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
[Bug ld/19579] [Regression] link error linking fortran code on s390x-linux-gnu
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19579 Nick Clifton changed: What|Removed |Added CC||nickc at redhat dot com --- Comment #1 from Nick Clifton --- Created attachment 9033 --> https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=9033&action=edit Proposed Patch Hi Matthias, Please try out this patch and see if it works for you. I am not 100% happy with this solution however, as it is a generic fix for what looks like a target specific problem. IE I could not find out what it was about the s390 target that was triggering this problem. Of course I might be wrong, the problem might be generic as well, but in that case, why has no one else reported it ? Cheers Nick -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ bug-binutils mailing list bug-binutils@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
Re: Bunutils bug report
Hi Piotr, > /usr/bin/ld: BFD (GNU Binutils for Debian) 2.22 2.22 is quite an old release. Please could you try the latest release (2.26) and see if the problem persists. If the problem is still there, please could you file a bug report here: https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/ Including a test case that allows us to reproduce the problem will really help. Cheers Nick ___ bug-binutils mailing list bug-binutils@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
[Bug binutils/19713] New: bfd/elflink.c does not handle octets_per_byte properly, line 11412
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19713 Bug ID: 19713 Summary: bfd/elflink.c does not handle octets_per_byte properly, line 11412 Product: binutils Version: 2.25 Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: P2 Component: binutils Assignee: unassigned at sourceware dot org Reporter: dgisselq at ieee dot org Target Milestone: --- There are several "FIXME" lines within bfd/elflink.c outlining how bfd does not properly support ELF files where octets per byte is not 1. I'm currently working on a port that relies on octets per byte being 4, not 1. Each of these fixme's therefore notes a problem with bfd/elflink.c. This bug references line 11412 of bfd/elflink.c in 2.25, where the output_offset needs to be multiplied by the number of octets per byte. While this bug exists in the current version, the line numbers may have changed. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ bug-binutils mailing list bug-binutils@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
[Bug ld/19480] [2.26.51 regression] ld creates wrong output for libstdc++6.dll for mingw32 (32-bit)
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19480 --- Comment #3 from Stephen Kitt --- -Wl,--no-gc-sections produces a working libstdc++-6.dll for me (with a ld built with the PE/COFF GC patch). I was wondering whether this could be due to a missing section name in pe.sc, but the fact that this is 32-bit specific suggests there's something else going on, right? With both DLLs to hand, how could I go about figuring out what went wrong? (The "bad" DLL has a bunch of undefined symbols.) -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ bug-binutils mailing list bug-binutils@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
[Bug ld/11539] ld --gc-sections should work for PE-COFF on MinGW
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=11539 Stephen Kitt changed: What|Removed |Added CC||steve at sk2 dot org -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ bug-binutils mailing list bug-binutils@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
[Bug ld/19579] [Regression] link error linking fortran code on s390x-linux-gnu
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19579 --- Comment #3 from Matthias Klose --- forgot to say, no error message was given. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ bug-binutils mailing list bug-binutils@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
[Bug ld/19579] [Regression] link error linking fortran code on s390x-linux-gnu
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19579 --- Comment #2 from Matthias Klose --- no, the link ends exit status one, and a partially written .libs/mopac7. $ file .libs/mopac7 .libs/mopac7: data The binutils built with this patch doesn't show any regressions in the testsuite. I'll start a debug build, and will report back tomorrow. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ bug-binutils mailing list bug-binutils@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
[Bug binutils/19715] New: bfd/elflink.c does not handle octets_per_byte properly, line 10374
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19715 Bug ID: 19715 Summary: bfd/elflink.c does not handle octets_per_byte properly, line 10374 Product: binutils Version: 2.25 Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: P2 Component: binutils Assignee: unassigned at sourceware dot org Reporter: dgisselq at ieee dot org Target Milestone: --- There are several "FIXME" lines within bfd/elflink.c outlining how bfd does not properly support ELF files where octets per byte is not 1. I'm currently working on a port that relies on octets per byte being 4, not 1. Each of these fixme's therefore notes a problem with bfd/elflink.c. This bug references line 10374 of bfd/elflink.c in 2.25, where the section size (given in octets) needs to be divided by the number of octets per byte before being added to the target memory offset. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ bug-binutils mailing list bug-binutils@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
[Bug binutils/19716] New: bfd/elflink.c does not handle octets_per_byte properly, line 10021
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19716 Bug ID: 19716 Summary: bfd/elflink.c does not handle octets_per_byte properly, line 10021 Product: binutils Version: 2.25 Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: P2 Component: binutils Assignee: unassigned at sourceware dot org Reporter: dgisselq at ieee dot org Target Milestone: --- There are several "FIXME" lines within bfd/elflink.c outlining how bfd does not properly support ELF files where octets per byte is not 1. I'm currently working on a port that relies on octets per byte being 4, not 1. Each of these fixme's therefore notes a problem with bfd/elflink.c. In this case, the bfd_set_section_contents lines that follow reference the output_offset, which is given in target byte values, and yet use this to change information within the file, for which units are octets. Therefore, the output_offset should be multiplied by octets_per_byte before the call to bfd_set_section_contents. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ bug-binutils mailing list bug-binutils@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
[Bug binutils/19717] New: bfd/elflink.c does not handle octets_per_byte properly, line 7956
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19717 Bug ID: 19717 Summary: bfd/elflink.c does not handle octets_per_byte properly, line 7956 Product: binutils Version: 2.25 Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: P2 Component: binutils Assignee: unassigned at sourceware dot org Reporter: dgisselq at ieee dot org Target Milestone: --- There are several "FIXME" lines within bfd/elflink.c outlining how bfd does not properly support ELF files where octets per byte is not 1. I'm currently working on a port that relies on octets per byte being 4, not 1. Each of these fixme's therefore notes a problem with bfd/elflink.c. This bug references line 7956 of bfd/elflink.c in 2.25, where the offset in the relocatable rel->r_offset, is in target byte units whereas the contents are in file octet units. Fixing this requires multiplying the r_offset field by the bfd_octets_per_byte value. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ bug-binutils mailing list bug-binutils@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
[Bug binutils/19718] New: bfd/elflink.c does not handle octets_per_byte properly, line 7923
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19718 Bug ID: 19718 Summary: bfd/elflink.c does not handle octets_per_byte properly, line 7923 Product: binutils Version: 2.25 Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: P2 Component: binutils Assignee: unassigned at sourceware dot org Reporter: dgisselq at ieee dot org Target Milestone: --- There are several "FIXME" lines within bfd/elflink.c outlining how bfd does not properly support ELF files where octets per byte is not 1. I'm currently working on a port that relies on octets per byte being 4, not 1. Each of these fixme's therefore notes a problem with bfd/elflink.c. This particular bug is very similar to the one just later in the file, and it refers to mixing the contents pointer (units of file octets) with the rel->r_offset value (units of target bytes, not necessarily octets). The latter needs to be multiplied by the octets_per_byte value to work. The bug is found in line 7923 of binutils-2.25/bfd/elflink.c. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ bug-binutils mailing list bug-binutils@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
