bfd.h fails to compile on FreeBSD: error: unknown type name 'ENUM_BITFIELD'

2023-02-27 Thread Yuri
Where is ENUM_BITFIELD expected to come from? Errors: || [ 50%] Building CXX object src/CMakeFiles/elf2llvm.dir/main.cpp.o || In file included from /home/yuri/binary-to-llvm/src/main.cpp:2: /usr/local/include/bfd.h|2039 col 3| error: unknown type name 'ENUM_BITFIELD' ||   ENUM_BITFIELD (compl

Re: Binutils release 2.40 require texinfo due to missing gas .info files

2023-02-27 Thread Benson Muite
> You are correct.  I have gone ahead and applied the patch that you > submitted for PR 28909.  (Sorry for the delay in reviewing it!) > Many thanks for your pointer to the timestamp issue. Looking forward to more contributions in future.

Re: Binutils release 2.40 require texinfo due to missing gas .info files

2023-02-27 Thread Nick Clifton
Hi Benson, This helps. However, the build script removes config.texi and then copies all.texi into config.texi changing timestamps and forcing a rebuild that requires makeinfo. This seems to have been encountered elsewhere, for example https://github.com/spack/spack/pull/34173 The reason for do

[Bug binutils/28909] 2.38 tarball (once again) requires makeinfo

2023-02-27 Thread cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28909 --- Comment #7 from cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org --- The master branch has been updated by Nick Clifton : https://sourceware.org/git/gitweb.cgi?p=binutils-gdb.git;h=8034b0baeac1b209b1742b3e8fa25015191b57b8 commit 8034b0baeac1b209b1742b3e8fa

[Bug binutils/28909] 2.38 tarball (once again) requires makeinfo

2023-02-27 Thread nickc at redhat dot com
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28909 Nick Clifton changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug binutils/30177] ubuntu x64 build failed for aarch64

2023-02-27 Thread fatalfeel at hotmail dot com
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30177 jesse stone changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|ubuntu x86_build failed for |ubuntu x64 build failed for

[Bug binutils/30177] ubuntu x86_build failed for arrch64

2023-02-27 Thread fatalfeel at hotmail dot com
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30177 jesse stone changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|build failed on arrch64 |ubuntu x86_build failed for

[Bug binutils/30177] New: build failed on arrch64

2023-02-27 Thread fatalfeel at hotmail dot com
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30177 Bug ID: 30177 Summary: build failed on arrch64 Product: binutils Version: 2.39 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P2 Component: binutils

[Bug gas/30162] Discrepancy in the interface exposed to tc_frob_label

2023-02-27 Thread piannetta at kalrayinc dot com
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30162 --- Comment #3 from Paul Iannetta --- Sorry, this is a non-problem, the TC_CHECK_LABEL hook which is called next exposes the interface I need. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

[Bug gas/30162] Discrepancy in the interface exposed to tc_frob_label

2023-02-27 Thread piannetta at kalrayinc dot com
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30162 --- Comment #2 from Paul Iannetta --- Then, how can I know from within TC_FROB_LABEL tell what is the next character after the label? If in one case (quoted symbol) INPUT_LINE_POINTER is pointing to ':' and in the other case (not quoted symbo