[Bug ld/29649] ld: Insufficient checking that BFD backend is suitable for ld emulation on aarch64
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29649 Nick Clifton changed: What|Removed |Added CC||nickc at redhat dot com Assignee|unassigned at sourceware dot org |nickc at redhat dot com Status|NEW |ASSIGNED --- Comment #1 from Nick Clifton --- Created attachment 14402 --> https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=14402&action=edit Proposed patch Hi Alex, It seems to me that adding a small additional check to the code in aarch64elf.em will suffice to fix this problem. What do you think of this patch ? Cheers Nick -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.
[Bug ld/29654] ld: add -w to suppress warnings
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29654 Nick Clifton changed: What|Removed |Added Assignee|unassigned at sourceware dot org |nickc at redhat dot com CC||nickc at redhat dot com Status|NEW |ASSIGNED --- Comment #1 from Nick Clifton --- Created attachment 14403 --> https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=14403&action=edit Proposed patch Hi Fanguri, Is this patch the kind of thing that you had in mind ? Cheers Nick -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.
Issue 49287 in oss-fuzz: binutils:fuzz_nm: Stack-overflow in mmo_get_symbols
Updates: Labels: -deadline-approaching -restrict-view-commit Deadline-Exceeded Comment #3 on issue 49287 by sheriffbot: binutils:fuzz_nm: Stack-overflow in mmo_get_symbols https://bugs.chromium.org/p/oss-fuzz/issues/detail?id=49287#c3 This bug has exceeded our disclosure deadline. It has been opened to the public. - Your friendly Sheriffbot -- You received this message because: 1. You were specifically CC'd on the issue You may adjust your notification preferences at: https://bugs.chromium.org/hosting/settings Reply to this email to add a comment.
[Bug ld/29654] ld: add -w to suppress warnings
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29654 --- Comment #2 from Fangrui Song --- (In reply to Nick Clifton from comment #1) > Created attachment 14403 [details] > Proposed patch > > Hi Fanguri, > > Is this patch the kind of thing that you had in mind ? > > Cheers > Nick Hi Nick, thanks for sending a patch! This looks good with just one thought: `config.fatal_warnings = false;` makes me wonder how -w interacts with --fatal-warnings. It seems that -w --fatal-warnings and --fatal-warnings -w have the same effect (-w wins, which makes sense IMO), so I guess `config.fatal_warnings = false;` can be omitted. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.
