[Bug ld/3998] New: Weird path problem

2007-02-07 Thread bugzilla at poradnik-webmastera dot com
Hi, I am trying to build coss-compiler, and I get following message: 'ld: cannot find /some/absolute/path/lib/libcrt.so inside /some/absolute/path' I found that this message is printed by ldfile_open_file function (ld/ldfile.c, line 417). Could you look on this issue? I suspect that I am doing sth

[Bug gas/3993] Assembler accepts extra qualifer in Intel syntax

2007-02-07 Thread hjl at lucon dot org
--- Additional Comments From hjl at lucon dot org 2007-02-07 17:51 --- (In reply to comment #5) > Regarding comment #2 and #3, I think the purpose of noprefix is to *allow* > source to omit the "%" prefix, ie. make the prefix optional. I don't think it > should force you to omit the pref

[Bug gas/3993] Assembler accepts extra qualifer in Intel syntax

2007-02-07 Thread amodra at bigpond dot net dot au
--- Additional Comments From amodra at bigpond dot net dot au 2007-02-07 17:29 --- Regarding comment #2 and #3, I think the purpose of noprefix is to *allow* source to omit the "%" prefix, ie. make the prefix optional. I don't think it should force you to omit the prefix, especially in

[Bug gas/3993] Assembler accepts extra qualifer in Intel syntax

2007-02-07 Thread hjl at lucon dot org
--- Additional Comments From hjl at lucon dot org 2007-02-07 17:19 --- I saw [EMAIL PROTECTED] invalid]$ cat foo.s .intel_syntax noprefix mov rax,oword ptr rbx [EMAIL PROTECTED] invalid]$ gcc -c foo.s [EMAIL PROTECTED] invalid]$ objdump -d foo.o foo.o: file format el

Re: arm-elf-as 2.16.1 always gives "relocation truncated to fit: R_ARM_PC24"

2007-02-07 Thread Daniel Jacobowitz
On Tue, Feb 06, 2007 at 04:04:02PM -0800, Bryce Schober wrote: > Not sure if this is true on latest binutils, but arm-elf-as 2.16.1 always > gives: I doubt that error is coming from the same place. Please file a bug report with a complete assemblable and linkable testcase that shows the error, i

[Bug gas/3993] Assembler accepts extra qualifer in Intel syntax

2007-02-07 Thread hjl at lucon dot org
--- Additional Comments From hjl at lucon dot org 2007-02-07 15:10 --- I would vote for not allowing any prefix when noprefix is specified for both Intel and AT&T modes. -- http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3993 --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You ar

[Bug gas/3993] Assembler accepts extra qualifer in Intel syntax

2007-02-07 Thread jbeulich at novell dot com
--- Additional Comments From jbeulich at novell dot com 2007-02-07 15:03 --- The first case must be accepted, since masm allows this as long as the pointer width specified matches the register width. masm fails when the latter isn't true, while gas emit a warning only. I don't think that

[Bug gas/3993] Assembler accepts extra qualifer in Intel syntax

2007-02-07 Thread hjl at lucon dot org
--- Additional Comments From hjl at lucon dot org 2007-02-07 14:24 --- Also this one: [EMAIL PROTECTED] intel]$ cat bar.s .intel_syntax noprefix mov %rax, rax [EMAIL PROTECTED] intel]$ gcc -c bar.s [EMAIL PROTECTED] intel]$ objdump -d bar.o bar.o: file format elf64-x

[Bug gas/3993] New: Assembler accepts extra qualifer in Intel syntax

2007-02-07 Thread hjl at lucon dot org
[EMAIL PROTECTED] intel]$ cat foo.s .intel_syntax noprefix mov rax,qword ptr rax [EMAIL PROTECTED] intel]$ gcc -c foo.s [EMAIL PROTECTED] intel]$ objdump -d foo.o foo.o: file format elf64-x86-64 Disassembly of section .text: <.text>: 0: 48 89 c0

[Bug gas/3990] New: [PATCH] IA64 gas DV: reports spurious WAW hazards

2007-02-07 Thread klchxbec at freenet dot de
Here's a small patch to fix a spurious WAW hazard reported on this for p2: {.mmi cmp.eq.or.andcm p3,p2=r49,r39 cmp.ne.and p2,p1=r49,r36 nop.i 0 ;; } Index: tc-ia64.c === RCS file: /c