[Bug binutils/16698] New: BFD (GNU Binutils) 2.24 assertion fail elf32-arm.c:12387
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16698 Bug ID: 16698 Summary: BFD (GNU Binutils) 2.24 assertion fail elf32-arm.c:12387 Product: binutils Version: 2.24 Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: P2 Component: binutils Assignee: unassigned at sourceware dot org Reporter: maillist-gdb at barfooze dot de when building git, util-linux, or lzo with the following CFLAGS: -fdata-sections -ffunction-sections -Os -g0 -fno-unwind-tables -fno-asynchronous-unwind-tables -Wa,--noexecstack -ftree-dce and the following LDFLAGS: -s -Wl,--gc-sections -Wl,-z,relro,-z,now the assertion in the title will be triggered. example: /root:/src/build/git/git-1.8.4$ gcc -fdata-sections -ffunction-sections -Os -g0 -fno-unwind-tables -fno-asynchronous-unwind-tables -Wa,--noexecstack -ftree-dce -I. -DNO_GETTEXT -DHAVE_PATHS_H -DHAVE_DEV_TTY -DSHA1_HEADER='' -DNO_STRLCPY -DUSE_WILDMATCH -DNO_MKSTEMPS -DSHELL_PATH='"/bin/sh"' -o git-cred ential-store -s -Wl,--gc-sections -Wl,-z,relro,-z,now credential-store.o libgit .a xdiff/lib.a -lz -lcrypto -lpthread /bin/ld: BFD (GNU Binutils) 2.24 assertion fail elf32-arm.c:12387 /bin/ld: BFD (GNU Binutils) 2.24 assertion fail elf32-arm.c:12387 collect2: error: ld returned 1 exit statusbin/ld: BFD (GNU Binutils) 2.24 assertion fail elf32-arm.c:12387 collect2: error: ld returned 1 exit status some tests revealed that it's the combination of -s and -Wl,--gc-sections that causes the hiccup, when dynamic linking is involved. maybe it's needed that these flags have been applied to both the dso's and the program involved. i've failed to produce a proper testcase. the issue was not existent in binutils 2.22 -- 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/16698] BFD (GNU Binutils) 2.24 assertion fail elf32-arm.c:12387
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16698 --- Comment #1 from maillist-gdb at barfooze dot de --- the bug #14189 ( https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=14189 ) may be related. -- 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 gold/16728] New: gold fails to hide hidden tls symbols
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16728
Bug ID: 16728
Summary: gold fails to hide hidden tls symbols
Product: binutils
Version: 2.24
Status: NEW
Severity: normal
Priority: P2
Component: gold
Assignee: ian at airs dot com
Reporter: maillist-gdb at barfooze dot de
CC: ccoutant at google dot com
firefox 27.0.1 fails to build with gold.
Error relocating
/src/build/firefox/mozilla-release/firefox-build-dir/dist/bin/libxul.so:
gTLSThreadID: symbol not found
readelf output:
01fbc4e0 02930010 R_X86_64_DTPMOD64 gTLSThreadID + 0
01fbc4e8 02930011 R_X86_64_DTPOFF64 gTLSThreadID + 0
659: 4 TLS LOCAL HIDDEN17 gTLSThreadID@@xul27
with ld.bfd, grepping for gTLSThreadID returns nothing.
minimal testcase dso_tls_hidden.cc:
#pragma GCC visibility push(hidden)
__thread int foo;
#pragma GCC visibility pop
int bar() { return foo == 1; }
$ g++ -fPIC -shared dso_tls_hidden.cc -o libfoo.so
$ readelf -a libfoo.so | grep foo
1b80 00090010 R_X86_64_DTPMOD64 foo + 0
1b88 00090011 R_X86_64_DTPOFF64 foo + 0
9: 4 TLS LOCAL HIDDEN15 foo
21: 4 TLS LOCAL HIDDEN15 foo
00: Rev: 1 Flags: BASE Index: 1 Cnt: 1 Name: libfoo.so
with ld.bfd:
$ g++ -fPIC -shared dso_tls_hidden.cc -o libfoo.so
$ readelf -a libfoo.so | grep foo
44: 4 TLS LOCAL DEFAULT 14 foo
--
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/16948] New: recent binutils/bfd release tarballs generated with ancient autoconf version
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16948 Bug ID: 16948 Summary: recent binutils/bfd release tarballs generated with ancient autoconf version Product: binutils Version: 2.24 Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: P2 Component: binutils Assignee: unassigned at sourceware dot org Reporter: maillist-gdb at barfooze dot de the release tarballs of binutils 2.24 and gdb 7.6 were generated with an ancient autoconf version (2.64), which causes long-fixed and nasty bugs ( https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16370 gdb bug report ) to reraise from the dead. to prevent such breakage in the future we should test for and deny running "make dist" successfully when the detected autoconf version is < 2.69. -- 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/16698] BFD (GNU Binutils) 2.24 assertion fail elf32-arm.c:12387
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16698 --- Comment #2 from maillist-gdb at barfooze dot de --- ping. anyone up for bisecting this? -- 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 gold/16728] gold fails to hide hidden tls symbols
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16728 maillist-gdb at barfooze dot de changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |2.25 -- 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 gold/16728] gold fails to hide hidden tls symbols
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16728 --- Comment #1 from maillist-gdb at barfooze dot de --- ping. fixing this bug is crucial to make gold fit for real-world usage; instead of staying a toy. -- 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 gold/16728] gold fails to hide hidden tls symbols
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16728 maillist-gdb at barfooze dot de changed: What|Removed |Added Severity|normal |critical -- 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/16698] BFD (GNU Binutils) 2.24 assertion fail elf32-arm.c:12387
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16698 --- Comment #3 from maillist-gdb at barfooze dot de --- the bug is present in 2.23.1, 2.23.2, 2.24, and 2.24.51 snapshot from today, but not in 2.22 -- 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/14189] --gc-sections doesn't work
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=14189 maillist-gdb at barfooze dot de changed: What|Removed |Added See Also||https://sourceware.org/bugz ||illa/show_bug.cgi?id=16698 -- 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/16698] BFD (GNU Binutils) 2.24 assertion fail elf32-arm.c:12387
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16698 maillist-gdb at barfooze dot de changed: What|Removed |Added CC||hjl.tools at gmail dot com, ||hp at sourceware dot org, ||nickc at redhat dot com, ||richard.sandiford at linaro dot or ||g See Also||https://sourceware.org/bugz ||illa/show_bug.cgi?id=14189 -- 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/16698] BFD (GNU Binutils) 2.24 assertion fail elf32-arm.c:12387
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16698 maillist-gdb at barfooze dot de changed: What|Removed |Added CC||maillist-gdb at barfooze dot de --- Comment #4 from maillist-gdb at barfooze dot de --- Created attachment 7634 --> https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=7634&action=edit testcase it was probably broken by the same commit that broke https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=14189#c3 here is a reduced testcase (created with delta, could probably be further reduced with c-reduce). -- 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/16698] BFD (GNU Binutils) 2.24 assertion fail elf32-arm.c:12387
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16698 maillist-gdb at barfooze dot de changed: What|Removed |Added Attachment #7634|0 |1 is obsolete|| --- Comment #7 from maillist-gdb at barfooze dot de --- Created attachment 7638 --> https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=7638&action=edit testcase, links successfully on other archs (In reply to Nick Clifton from comment #6) > The testcase is missing a definition of the function pcap_offline_read(). > > If a dummy one is supplied then the test compiles and links without any > problems - except for a few warnings from gcc about assignments making > pointers from integers - using the latest gcc and binutils sources. sorry, here's a testcase that would link successfully if the assertion was not raised (and does so with a different binutils version or arch). -- 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/16698] BFD (GNU Binutils) 2.24 assertion fail elf32-arm.c:12387
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16698 --- Comment #9 from maillist-gdb at barfooze dot de --- Created attachment 7663 --> https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=7663&action=edit generated object files sorry for the delay; back from holidays. here are the generated obj files. since you do not experience the same problem, i suspect it may be related to the 2 external symbols that get pulled in: 026c 0e1c R_ARM_CALL abort 04d8 0c1c R_ARM_CALL __aeabi_uidiv one is of libc and the other of libgcc. arm-linux-musleabi-readelf -a `arm-linux-musleabi-gcc -print-libgcc-file-name` | grep __aeabi_uidiv | head 17: 0 FUNCGLOBAL HIDDEN 1 __aeabi_uidiv $ arm-linux-musleabi-readelf -a $HOME/musl-cross-4.8.3/arm-linux-musleabi/arm-linux-musleabi/lib/libc.a | grep abort File: $HOME/musl-cross-4.8.3/arm-linux-musleabi/arm-linux-musleabi/lib/libc.a(abort.o) 1: 0 FILELOCAL DEFAULT ABS abort.c 16: 24 FUNCGLOBAL DEFAULT1 abort 0034 161c R_ARM_CALL abort 22: 0 NOTYPE GLOBAL DEFAULT UND abort -- 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/16948] recent binutils/bfd release tarballs generated with ancient autoconf version
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16948 maillist-gdb at barfooze dot de changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||16370 -- 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/16698] BFD (GNU Binutils) 2.24 assertion fail elf32-arm.c:12387
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16698 --- Comment #11 from maillist-gdb at barfooze dot de --- according to the contents of the "abfd" variable when the assert is raised, it's caused by the stdin.o and fflush.o object files in libc.a, which both do some weak symbol magic to pull in specific functions or data only when they're actually used. i'm not fully understanding yet what's happening there... the code in question is http://git.etalabs.net/cgit/musl/tree/src/stdio/fflush.c#n23 http://git.etalabs.net/cgit/musl/tree/src/stdio/stdin.c#n15 (variable is defined here http://git.etalabs.net/cgit/musl/tree/src/stdio/__stdio_exit.c#n4 ) it seems they're getting pulled in via crt1.o -> __libc_start_main -> exit if i can find a way to get ld to list all the object files it pulls in from libc.a, i could extract those and attach them here. -- 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/16698] BFD (GNU Binutils) 2.24 assertion fail elf32-arm.c:12387
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16698 --- Comment #13 from maillist-gdb at barfooze dot de --- Created attachment 7670 --> https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=7670&action=edit testcase including all object files and stripped down libc.a savefile.c in the testcase uses both stdin and fflush - i wonder how i could miss that. using -Wl,-M i hunted down all referenced objects files and put them into a mini libc.a, and added musl's crt files. Nick, please see attached tarball, it contains everything needed to reproduce the issue - the only external thing getting pulled in is libgcc. the linker command used by gcc was extracted via strace, simplified and put into link.sh. the file test.elf.wlm contains the output of -Wl,-M. -- 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/16698] BFD (GNU Binutils) 2.24 assertion fail elf32-arm.c:12387
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16698 --- Comment #14 from maillist-gdb at barfooze dot de --- Created attachment 7671 --> https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=7671&action=edit standalone testcase including reduced libc sources while trying to reduce the libc sources that got linked in, i found that the assertion is only triggered if libc is compiled with "-g". here is another testcase including delta-reduced libc sources (+ makefile changes). this one still triggers in stdin.o, while the "real" object files in my previous comment raise a total of 3 assertions in stdin.o and fflush.o. -- 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/16698] BFD (GNU Binutils) 2.24 assertion fail elf32-arm.c:12387
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16698
maillist-gdb at barfooze dot de changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #7638|0 |1
is obsolete||
Attachment #7663|0 |1
is obsolete||
Attachment #7670|0 |1
is obsolete||
Attachment #7671|0 |1
is obsolete||
--- Comment #15 from maillist-gdb at barfooze dot de ---
Created attachment 7672
--> https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=7672&action=edit
manually reduced testcase to the bare minimum
i manually reduced libc/stdin.c to the following
typedef struct _IO_FILE FILE;
struct _IO_FILE { int lock; };
static FILE f = { .lock = -1};
FILE *const (stdin) = &f;
this construct, compiled with -g triggers the bug in another object that
references it in an unused function when linked with -s --gc-sections...
for example:
typedef struct _IO_FILE FILE;
extern FILE *const stdin;
typedef struct pcap pcap_t;
struct pcap_sf { FILE *rfile; };
struct pcap { struct pcap_sf sf; };
static void unused_func_referencing_stdin(pcap_t *p) {
if (p->sf.rfile != (stdin)) (void)fclose(p->sf.rfile);
}
int pcap_loop(pcap_t *p, int cnt, void* callback, char *user) { }
i reduced the testcase again to the bare minimum, it's just 2 files and 2 libc
files now with a total of about 20 lines
--
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/16698] BFD (GNU Binutils) 2.24 assertion fail elf32-arm.c:12387
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16698 --- Comment #17 from maillist-gdb at barfooze dot de --- the "host" (i.e. the machine the compiler runs on) is x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu (sabotage linux using musl libc). binutils 2.24 was built with these flags: --target=arm-linux-musleabi and the entire toolchain using these scripts: https://github.com/GregorR/musl-cross does your /arm-linux-gnueabi/libgcc directory contain a libc.a as well ? this could prevent the built libc.a from getting used. using the testcase here, it doesn't (checked with strace -f make 2>&1 | grep open | grep -v ENOENT) -- 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/16698] BFD (GNU Binutils) 2.24 assertion fail elf32-arm.c:12387
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16698
--- Comment #18 from maillist-gdb at barfooze dot de ---
i was able to reproduce the issue on a glibc box (opensuse 11.2) with the
latest testcase and pre-compiled musl-cross toolchain from
https://e82b27f594c813a5a4ea5b07b06f16c3777c3b8c.googledrive.com/host/0BwnS5DMB0YQ6bDhPZkpOYVFhbk0/musl-1.1.1/crossx86-arm-linux-musleabi-1.1.1.tar.xz
but not with the precompiled linaro arm-linux-gnueabihf *hardfloat* toolchain
from
http://releases.linaro.org/14.04/components/toolchain/binaries/gcc-linaro-arm-linux-gnueabihf-4.8-2014.04_linux.tar.xz
i was, however able to reproduce the issue with the latest codesourcery
toolchain:
https://sourcery.mentor.com/GNUToolchain/package12774/public/arm-none-eabi/arm-2014.05-28-arm-none-eabi-i686-pc-linux-gnu.tar.bz2
supplying a stub memcpy.c
int memcpy(void *a, void *b, long n) { return 0; }
and a stub abort.c
void abort(void) { for(;;); }
in libc/ to satisfy libgcc dependencies of the codesourcery toolchain,
i get this:
arm-none-linux-gnueabi-ld -Bstatic -X -m armelf_linux_eabi -o test.elf -s
crt/crt1.o crt/crti.o
~/musl-cross/arm-2014.05/lib/gcc/arm-none-linux-gnueabi/4.8.3//crtbeginT.o \
-L . -L ~/musl-cross/arm-2014.05/lib/gcc/arm-none-linux-gnueabi/4.8.3/ test.o
--gc-sections -ltest1 --start-group -lgcc_eh -lgcc -lc --end-group \
--start-group -lgcc -lgcc_eh -lc --end-group
~/musl-cross/arm-2014.05/lib/gcc/arm-none-linux-gnueabi/4.8.3//crtend.o
crt/crtn.o
arm-none-linux-gnueabi-ld: BFD (Sourcery CodeBench Lite 2014.05-29)
2.24.51.20140217 assertion fail
/scratch/maciej/arm-linux-2014.05-rel/obj/binutils-src-2014.05-29-arm-none-linux-gnueabi-i686-pc-linux-gnu/bfd/elf32-arm.c:12478
make: *** [test.elf] Error 1
--
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/16698] BFD (GNU Binutils) 2.24 assertion fail elf32-arm.c:12387
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16698 --- Comment #19 from maillist-gdb at barfooze dot de --- oops wrong link, the codesourcery toolchain which raised the assertion was https://sourcery.mentor.com/GNUToolchain/package12813/public/arm-none-linux-gnueabi/arm-2014.05-29-arm-none-linux-gnueabi-i686-pc-linux-gnu.tar.bz2 -- 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 gold/16728] gold fails to hide hidden tls symbols
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16728 maillist-gdb at barfooze dot de changed: What|Removed |Added CC||maillist-gdb at barfooze dot de -- 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/16698] BFD (GNU Binutils) 2.24 assertion fail elf32-arm.c:12387
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16698 --- Comment #20 from maillist-gdb at barfooze dot de --- (In reply to maillist-gdb from comment #18) > i was able to reproduce the issue on a glibc box (opensuse 11.2) with the > latest testcase > i was, however able to reproduce the issue with the latest codesourcery > toolchain: > https://sourcery.mentor.com/GNUToolchain/package12774/public/arm-none-eabi/ > arm-2014.05-28-arm-none-eabi-i686-pc-linux-gnu.tar.bz2 to clarify, i used the (latest) codesourcery toolchain on the above mentioned openSuSE box, and could reproduce the issue. the toolchain however is the one from the link of comment #19 Nick, would you care to take another look with the above mentioned toolchain? (and after you've seen the bug, maybe updating the binutils version it uses) Since i spent nearly 2 days of effort to hunt down the issue; it would be a pity if this PR dies without getting the issue solved. -- 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/16698] BFD (GNU Binutils) 2.24 assertion fail elf32-arm.c:12387
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16698 --- Comment #22 from maillist-gdb at barfooze dot de --- are you sure you're not using a hardfloat toolchain ? those seem to be immune to the bug. anything else i tested is affected. -- 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/16698] BFD (GNU Binutils) 2.24 assertion fail elf32-arm.c:12387
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16698 maillist-gdb at barfooze dot de changed: What|Removed |Added Attachment #7672|0 |1 is obsolete|| --- Comment #23 from maillist-gdb at barfooze dot de --- Created attachment 7847 --> https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=7847&action=edit updated testcase updated testcase: less code, better makefile (libgcc dir is automatically found) -- 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/16698] BFD (GNU Binutils) 2.24 assertion fail elf32-arm.c:12387
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16698 --- Comment #24 from maillist-gdb at barfooze dot de --- (In reply to Nick Clifton from comment #21) > I am sorry but this bug is just not reproducible with the FSF mainline > binutils sources. :-( I can only conclude that the bug must be something to > do with whatever patches CodeSourcery have applied to their toolchain. the bug happens with vanilla unpatched binutils 2.24, as well as with the codesourcery toolchain, so it's definitely not due to custom codesourcery patches (In reply to maillist-gdb from comment #22) > are you sure you're not using a hardfloat toolchain ? those seem to be > immune to the bug. anything else i tested is affected. i just tested with a musl-cross arm-eabihf toolchain, the bug exists there as well. so it's interesting that it doesnt happen with the linaro hardfloat toolchain. -- 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/16698] BFD (GNU Binutils) 2.24 assertion fail elf32-arm.c:12387
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16698 maillist-gdb at barfooze dot de changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|--- |OBSOLETE --- Comment #25 from maillist-gdb at barfooze dot de --- according to tests done with latest binutils snapshot (2.24.90) the issue is now fixed. at least my testcase doesn't trigger the assert anymore. -- 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/17532] New: regression: binutils 2.24.90 doesnt support -l:path/to/lib.a syntax anymore
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17532 Bug ID: 17532 Summary: regression: binutils 2.24.90 doesnt support -l:path/to/lib.a syntax anymore Product: binutils Version: 2.24 Status: NEW Severity: critical Priority: P2 Component: binutils Assignee: unassigned at sourceware dot org Reporter: maillist-gdb at barfooze dot de the -l: command line parameter is supposed to be usable with an explicit filename root:/src/build/bash/bash-4.3$ ls -la lib/readline/libreadline.a -rw-r--r--1 root root589444 Nov 2 17:36 lib/readline/libreadline.a root:/src/build/bash/bash-4.3$ gcc -L./builtins -L./lib/readline -L./lib/readlin e -L./lib/glob -L./lib/tilde -L./lib/sh -s -Wl,--gc-sections -Wl,-z,relro,-z,no w -static -rdynamic -fdata-sections -ffunction-sections -Os -g0 -fno-unwind-ta bles -fno-asynchronous-unwind-tables -Wa,--noexecstack -ftree-dce -o bash shell. o eval.o y.tab.o general.o make_cmd.o print_cmd.o dispose_cmd.o execute_cmd.o v ariables.o copy_cmd.o error.o expr.o flags.o jobs.o subst.o hashcmd.o hashlib.o mailcheck.o trap.o input.o unwind_prot.o pathexp.o sig.o test.o version.o alias. o array.o arrayfunc.o assoc.o braces.o bracecomp.o bashhist.o bashline.o list.o stringlib.o locale.o findcmd.o redir.o pcomplete.o pcomplib.o syntax.o xmalloc. o -lbuiltins -lglob -lsh -l:./lib/readline/libreadline.a -lhistory -ltermcap -l tilde -ldl /bin/ld: cannot find -l:./lib/readline/libreadline.a collect2: error: ld returned 1 exit status root:/src/build/bash/bash-4.3$ ld --version GNU ld (GNU Binutils) 2.24.90.20141014 -- 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/17532] regression: binutils 2.24.90 doesnt support -l:path/to/lib.a syntax anymore
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17532 maillist-gdb at barfooze dot de changed: What|Removed |Added Component|binutils|ld -- 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/17532] regression: binutils 2.24.90 doesnt support -l:path/to/lib.a syntax anymore
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17532 maillist-gdb at barfooze dot de changed: What|Removed |Added Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED Resolution|INVALID |--- --- Comment #2 from maillist-gdb at barfooze dot de --- (In reply to Alan Modra from comment #1) > Not a bug. -l searches in the library path, ie. directories given by -L and > some default directories, typically /lib and /usr/lib. None of these > directories contain a file ./lib/readline/libreadline.a -l != -l: (note the colon) the "l:" mechanism exists specifically to supply a full path that's detached from the usual -L directory mechanisms (or at least it could be used in the past that way, which was a very handy feature). in my case its needed to inject the path to the "in-tree" version of libreadline.a because of priority issues in -L paths passed to the build. (a crosscompiler is used, but the libdir is outside the crosscompiler prefix, so we pass "foo-gcc -L/rootfs/lib" as CC, and as there's no -isystem equivalent for libraries, our -L path always takes precedence over the ones added by bash's buildsystem as ours comes first on the command line, which in this specific case ends up linking an incompatible version of libreadline.a from /rootfs/lib) it also does not work anymore when using an absolute path, but it worked in all combinations with 2.24. note that ld complains about -l:./lib/readline/libreadline.a rather than ./lib/readline/libreadline.a -- 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/17532] regression: binutils 2.24.90 doesnt support -l:path/to/lib.a syntax anymore
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17532 --- Comment #4 from maillist-gdb at barfooze dot de --- oh. i see. thanks for the expanation. however i'm curious if you agree that the old behaviour was more useful, even though it was unintended ? also i spent about 1 hour trying to find the commit that fixed this "bug", unsuccessfully, and as you seem to know about it, would you be so kind as to provide the commit id that changed the behaviour? thanks! -- 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
