[Bug binutils/22555] New: readelf exit status is 0 for empty zero-length file
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22555 Bug ID: 22555 Summary: readelf exit status is 0 for empty zero-length file Product: binutils Version: 2.29 Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: P2 Component: binutils Assignee: unassigned at sourceware dot org Reporter: mstahl at redhat dot com Target Milestone: --- from Fedora 26 to Fedora 27, the readelf exit status changed from 1 to 0 when running "readelf -d" on an empty file: old: > touch /tmp/foo > readelf -d /tmp/foo readelf: /tmp/foo: Error: Failed to read file's magic number > echo $? 1 > readelf --version GNU readelf version 2.27-28.fc26 Copyright (C) 2016 Free Software Foundation, Inc. This program is free software; you may redistribute it under the terms of the GNU General Public License version 3 or (at your option) any later version. This program has absolutely no warranty. new: > touch /tmp/foo > readelf -d /tmp/foo readelf: /tmp/foo: Error: Failed to read file's magic number > echo $? 0 > readelf --version GNU readelf version 2.29-6.fc27 Copyright (C) 2017 Free Software Foundation, Inc. This program is free software; you may redistribute it under the terms of the GNU General Public License version 3 or (at your option) any later version. This program has absolutely no warranty. but readelf still prints an error - so i think it should not exit with 0. -- 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/22555] readelf exit status is 0 for empty zero-length file
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22555 Nick Clifton changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED CC||nickc at redhat dot com Resolution|--- |INVALID --- Comment #1 from Nick Clifton --- Hi Michael, This is a Fedora specific bug. The FSF binutils sources do the right thing. Please could you refile the bug report using the Fedora bugzilla system here: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Fedora 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 gas/22559] AArch64 disassembles lane indexed dot product instructions incorrectly
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22559 Tamar Christina changed: What|Removed |Added Target||aarch64-* Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Assignee|unassigned at sourceware dot org |tnfchris at sourceware 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 gas/22559] New: AArch64 disassembles lane indexed dot product instructions incorrectly
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22559 Bug ID: 22559 Summary: AArch64 disassembles lane indexed dot product instructions incorrectly Product: binutils Version: 2.29 Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: P2 Component: gas Assignee: unassigned at sourceware dot org Reporter: tnfchris at sourceware dot org Target Milestone: --- Dot product deviates from the normal disassembling semantics for AArch64. The instruction v0.2s, v0.8b, v0.4b[0] should disassemble to v0.2s, v0.8b, v0.4b[0] and not v0.2s, v0.8b, v0.b[0]. -- 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 gas/22554] .largecomm, .lbss, .ldata, and .lrodata are still not documented after many, many years
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22554 Andreas Schwab changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE --- Comment #1 from Andreas Schwab --- dup *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 22553 *** -- 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 gas/22553] .largecomm, .lbss, .ldata, and .lrodata are still not documented after many, many years
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22553 --- Comment #1 from Andreas Schwab --- *** Bug 22554 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** -- 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/22465] objcopy interleave fails if section address not multiple of interleave
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22465 --- Comment #2 from cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org --- The master branch has been updated by Jim Wilson : https://sourceware.org/git/gitweb.cgi?p=binutils-gdb.git;h=1c9c7ce078427891a94dc7604ce9e62175ebfda5 commit 1c9c7ce078427891a94dc7604ce9e62175ebfda5 Author: Jim Wilson Date: Wed Dec 6 10:34:36 2017 -0800 Objcopy interleave fails if section address not multiple of interleave. PR 22465 binutils/ * objcopy.c (copy_section): New local extra. If isection->lma not exactly divisible by interleave, then bias from. Also adjust osection->lma if necessary. ld/ * testsuite/ld-elf/interleave-0.d, testsuite/ld-elf/interleave-4.d, * testsuite/ld-elf/interleave.ld, testsuite/ld-elf/interleave.s: New. -- 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/22465] objcopy interleave fails if section address not multiple of interleave
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22465 Jim Wilson changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|--- |FIXED --- Comment #3 from Jim Wilson --- Fixed on mainline. -- 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/22465] objcopy interleave fails if section address not multiple of interleave
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22465 Jim Wilson changed: What|Removed |Added Assignee|unassigned at sourceware dot org |wilson at gcc dot gnu.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 binutils/22552] readelf - heap buffer overflow in load_debug_section()
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22552 Alan Modra changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|--- |FIXED Target Milestone|--- |2.30 --- Comment #2 from Alan Modra --- Fixed -- 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
