against
2.17 but patches OK against 2.18.
--
Chris Metcalf, Tilera Corp.
http://www.tilera.com
//tilera/user/cmetcalf/branch/tools/gnu/ld/lexsup.c#2 -
/u/cmetcalf/p4/branch/tools/gnu/ld/lexsup.c
--- /tmp/tmp.23673.27 2008-05-30 13:56:59.0 -0400
+++ /u/cmetcalf/p4/branch/tool
It's not a 32-bit relocation, it's a 16-bit relocation.
Chris
On 12/1/2005 12:27 AM, Alan Modra wrote:
On Wed, Nov 30, 2005 at 03:02:25PM -0500, Chris Metcalf wrote:
It appears that if you have a 64-bit host targetting a 32-bit platform,
the complain_overflow_bitfie
cut signmask down with addrmask so it's 0x instead (where
addrmask is the mask for the target bitsize).
This bug is present in binutils-2.16.1.
Chris Metcalf
--- binutils-2.16.1/bfd/reloc.c.orig2005-11-30 14:49:23.0 -0500
+++ binutils-2.16.1/bfd/reloc.c 2005-11-30 14:52
I noticed this buglet while reading the hard copy: In section 2.1,
--hash-size has an @kindex but no @item, so you don't actually see the
option name in the text.
Also, a bit lower down is written "Another affect of the switch", and
this should be "effect".
Chr
