[Bug gprofng/29476] gprofng.texi makeinfo build failure on centos 7

https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29476 --- Comment #2 from Vladimir Mezentsev --- We need makeinfo 6.5 or newer. It looks like lines 196-200 in gprofng/configure.ac are incorrect: % cat -n gprofng/configure.ac ... 196case x"`$MAKEINFO --version | grep 'GNU texinfo'`" i

[Bug gprofng/29476] gprofng.texi makeinfo build failure on centos 7

https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29476 --- Comment #1 from nightstrike --- It looks like gprofng's configure tries to check the version of makeinfo and disable building documentation if it's too old, but that doesn't actually work. If you run make in the gprofng subdir, it will wo

[Bug gprofng/29476] New: gprofng.texi makeinfo build failure on centos 7

https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29476 Bug ID: 29476 Summary: gprofng.texi makeinfo build failure on centos 7 Product: binutils Version: 2.39 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P2 Compo

[Bug gas/28351] aarch64 ".xword :dtprel:t" is not supported

https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28351 evan changed: What|Removed |Added CC||evan_l00 at qq dot com -- You are receiving t

[Bug binutils/29075] objdump -S does not support debuginfod

https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29075 Aaron Merey changed: What|Removed |Added Assignee|nickc at redhat dot com|amerey at redhat dot com

Re: A request to add information on gprofng

On 8/11/22 7:35 AM, Nick Clifton wrote: But I am totally OK with you having a sub-directorty below the sourceware binutils main web directory.     OK, let's go with that.     Thank you     Kurt

Re: A request to add information on gprofng

Hi Nick, > Makes sense to me. Thanks. > No - you would be the first. :-) :-) We could do some trailblazing here. If it works out well, others may want to follow. > Well unless you count the online documentation which is really just > an HTML formatted copy of the .texi files found in the sourc

[Bug gprofng/29465] [docs] File version.texi is created in the binutils source directory

https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29465 Ruud van der Pas changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|[gprofng doc] File |[docs] File version.texi is

[Bug gprofng/29470] [test suite] The test suite should be made more flexible

https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29470 Ruud van der Pas changed: What|Removed |Added CC||ruud.vanderpas at oracle dot com

Re: A request to add information on gprofng

Hi Kurt,     I did inquire with the overseers about what was possible approximately two months ago and they suggested it would be best under binutils. Makes sense to me.     A few things we are thinking would help gprofng:     - a gprofng FAQ where questions could be answered and rec

[Bug gprofng/29470] New: [test suite] The test suite should be made more flexible

https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29470 Bug ID: 29470 Summary: [test suite] The test suite should be made more flexible Product: binutils Version: 2.40 (HEAD) Status: NEW Severity: normal

[Bug gas/29466] APP/NO_APP with linefile

https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29466 --- Comment #5 from Mikael Pettersson --- I can confirm that repeating my build of a vax-linux cross compiler using the current HEAD of binutils-2_39-branch succeeds. Thanks. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for

[Bug gprofng/29465] [gprofng doc] File version.texi is created in the binutils source directory

https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29465 Ruud van der Pas changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|[display html] File |[gprofng doc] File

Re: A request to add information on gprofng

Hi Nick, Thanks very much for the response and apologies for the delay in my response. We were out yesterday. Trying to escape the heatwave hitting us over here :-) Please allow me to respond to Kurt's response to your email. > great Yes! Thank you very much. It looks very good :-) >> Prob

[Bug gas/29466] APP/NO_APP with linefile

https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29466 Alan Modra changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|ASSIGNED

[Bug gas/29466] APP/NO_APP with linefile

https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29466 --- Comment #3 from cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org --- The binutils-2_39-branch branch has been updated by Alan Modra : https://sourceware.org/git/gitweb.cgi?p=binutils-gdb.git;h=9e855cffa1fda44629e7f9b76dfa3e5a51a440e9 commit 9e855cffa1fda44