[Bug ld/28879] [2.38 Regression] ld.bfd: possibly incorrect "undefined reference" errors

2022-02-11 Thread evangelos at foutrelis dot com
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28879 --- Comment #12 from Evangelos Foutras --- (In reply to H.J. Lu from comment #11) > A patch is posted at > > https://sourceware.org/pipermail/binutils/2022-February/119740.html Works great, thanks! :) (Gave it a quick test by rebuilding the

[Bug ld/28879] [2.38 Regression] ld.bfd: possibly incorrect "undefined reference" errors

2022-02-11 Thread evangelos at foutrelis dot com
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28879 --- Comment #9 from Evangelos Foutras --- Created attachment 13973 --> https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=13973&action=edit Build log from the source build of libheif -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC

[Bug ld/28879] [2.38 Regression] ld.bfd: possibly incorrect "undefined reference" errors

2022-02-11 Thread evangelos at foutrelis dot com
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28879 --- Comment #8 from Evangelos Foutras --- Created attachment 13972 --> https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=13972&action=edit Reproducer with source build Sorry this took a while, I tried to make it use the bundled x265 library

[Bug ld/28879] [2.38 Regression] ld.bfd: possibly incorrect "undefined reference" errors

2022-02-11 Thread evangelos at foutrelis dot com
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28879 --- Comment #6 from Evangelos Foutras --- (In reply to H.J. Lu from comment #5) > It may be a GCC 11.1 bug. Are you referring to the error about _ZTI11QSharedData@Qt_5 in my last comment, or the original issue? The system libQt5Gui was indeed

[Bug ld/28879] [2.38 Regression] ld.bfd: possibly incorrect "undefined reference" errors

2022-02-11 Thread evangelos at foutrelis dot com
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28879 --- Comment #4 from Evangelos Foutras --- Thank you for looking into this. :) I applied your diff on top of binutils 2.38 and was able to successfully build libheif and nextcloud-client with it. Previously, these two Arch Linux packages (and

[Bug ld/28879] New: [2.38 Regression] ld.bfd: possibly incorrect "undefined reference" errors

2022-02-10 Thread evangelos at foutrelis dot com
NCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P2 Component: ld Assignee: unassigned at sourceware dot org Reporter: evangelos at foutrelis dot com Target Milestone: --- Created attachment 13969 --> https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=13969&

[Bug binutils/23460] regression: ar can not create archive containing many (>1024) lto object files

2018-08-17 Thread evangelos at foutrelis dot com
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23460 --- Comment #19 from Evangelos Foutras --- I believe it's safe to remove the call to dlclose() which, as far as I can tell, would restore the previous behavior of the plugin loader. I will do a Chromium build to verify that the patch from comm

[Bug binutils/23460] regression: ar can not create archive containing many (>1024) lto object files

2018-08-16 Thread evangelos at foutrelis dot com
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23460 --- Comment #16 from Evangelos Foutras --- (In reply to zenith432 from comment #15) > = begin patch > diff --git a/bfd/plugin.c b/bfd/plugin.c > index d9b9e2f1..3b738c38 100644 > --- a/bfd/plugin.c > +++ b/bfd/plugin.c > @@ -274,7 +274,7 @

[Bug binutils/23460] regression: ar can not create archive containing many (>1024) lto object files

2018-08-14 Thread evangelos at foutrelis dot com
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23460 --- Comment #14 from Evangelos Foutras --- (In reply to Nick Clifton from comment #11) > I just do not like the idea of not tidying up after ourselves. Mind you it > is only linker plugins that call dlclose. Plugins for other tools (eg ar, >

[Bug ld/23428] ld does not put program headers in a code-only load segment

2018-08-11 Thread evangelos at foutrelis dot com
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23428 --- Comment #19 from Evangelos Foutras --- (In reply to H.J. Lu from comment #18) > (In reply to Evangelos Foutras from comment #16) > > The test case from comment #14 is still reproducible for me with both > > binutils master (1dc9e2d6) and b

[Bug ld/23428] ld does not put program headers in a code-only load segment

2018-08-11 Thread evangelos at foutrelis dot com
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23428 --- Comment #16 from Evangelos Foutras --- The test case from comment #14 is still reproducible for me with both binutils master (1dc9e2d6) and binutils-2_31-branch (6ee91b1e). No change at all in the resulting binary, compared to just the pat

[Bug ld/23428] ld does not put program headers in a code-only load segment

2018-08-10 Thread evangelos at foutrelis dot com
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23428 --- Comment #13 from Evangelos Foutras --- Created attachment 11177 --> https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=11177&action=edit libgcc-8-dev rebuilt with --enable-cet=auto (for Debian testing) (In reply to H.J. Lu from comment #

[Bug ld/23428] ld does not put program headers in a code-only load segment

2018-08-10 Thread evangelos at foutrelis dot com
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23428 --- Comment #11 from Evangelos Foutras --- Created attachment 11174 --> https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=11174&action=edit Test case with Arch's and Debian's GCC-provided crt{begin,end}.o (In reply to nsz from comment #10)

[Bug ld/23428] ld does not put program headers in a code-only load segment

2018-08-09 Thread evangelos at foutrelis dot com
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23428 --- Comment #9 from Evangelos Foutras --- (In reply to nsz from comment #8) > it works for me, please post the readelf -aW ./a.out somewhere (e.g. musl > list) https://paste.xinu.at/igNNdz/ -- but as mentioned below, it's the same as unpatche

[Bug ld/23428] ld does not put program headers in a code-only load segment

2018-08-09 Thread evangelos at foutrelis dot com
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23428 Evangelos Foutras changed: What|Removed |Added CC||evangelos at foutrelis dot com

[Bug ld/23486] GNU_PROPERTY_X86_ISA_1_USED isn't merged properly

2018-08-08 Thread evangelos at foutrelis dot com
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23486 Evangelos Foutras changed: What|Removed |Added CC||evangelos at foutrelis dot com

[Bug binutils/23460] regression: ar can not create archive containing many (>1024) lto object files

2018-08-07 Thread evangelos at foutrelis dot com
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23460 Evangelos Foutras changed: What|Removed |Added CC||evangelos at foutrelis dot com

[Bug ld/16457] Weak reference leads to bogus entry in .gnu.version_r section

2014-11-12 Thread evangelos at foutrelis dot com
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16457 Evangelos Foutras changed: What|Removed |Added CC||evangelos at foutrelis dot com

[Bug ld/16452] ELF executable with weak reference linked with ld causes assertion in ld.so

2014-11-12 Thread evangelos at foutrelis dot com
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16452 Evangelos Foutras changed: What|Removed |Added CC||evangelos at foutrelis dot com