https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21368
Nick Clifton changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21368
--- Comment #4 from Budi ---
don't laugh at me.. but I frankly don't understand the patch script, is it
a kind of 'makefile' language ?
What I have in mind now is just how to move our conversation to a forum
that is heard and learnt by many mo
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18466
--- Comment #5 from cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org ---
The master branch has been updated by Alan Modra :
https://sourceware.org/git/gitweb.cgi?p=binutils-gdb.git;h=fbea15088db59186960134d11b8bf98070224d6c
commit fbea15088db59186960134d11b8bf
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21274
--- Comment #6 from cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org ---
The master branch has been updated by Alan Modra :
https://sourceware.org/git/gitweb.cgi?p=binutils-gdb.git;h=fbea15088db59186960134d11b8bf98070224d6c
commit fbea15088db59186960134d11b8bf
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21274
Alan Modra changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Version|unspecified
> I assume that you mean "readelf -D -r w" here, as you are looking for
dynamic relocs ?
...
96e4 0b14 R_ARM_COPY96e4 debug_f
found.
> What happens when you run the compiled w.c test program ? Is there a
seg-fault for
> accessing memory at address 0 ?
Yes.
I switched to
Hello,
I seem to have found a bug in GNU as, when using the intel syntax on x86_64,
for some mov instructions, as explained below. I looked into the archive,
and could not find a mention of this bug. You'll find two source files
attached.
Best regards,
Sébastien Dusuel
--
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21368
--- Comment #5 from Nick Clifton ---
Hi Budi,
> don't laugh at me..
Never. I fully understand that all of this is very technical and can be quite
overwhelming for someone not familiar with the workings of open source
projects.
> but I fra
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21373
Bug ID: 21373
Summary: intel syntax on x86_64 offset miscalculation
Product: binutils
Version: 2.29 (HEAD)
Status: NEW
Severity: normal
Priority: P2
Component
On Tue, Apr 11, 2017 at 10:48:06AM +0200, Sébastien Dusuel wrote:
> I seem to have found a bug in GNU as, when using the intel syntax on x86_64,
Indeed you have. I have opened
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21373
to track this issue.
--
Alan Modra
Australia Development Lab, IBM
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21373
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
CC|
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21375
Bug ID: 21375
Summary: MIPS: Non-zero run-time value produced for PIC
references to undefined hidden or internal weak
symbols
Product: binutils
Version: 2.29 (
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21334
Maciej W. Rozycki changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |ASSIGNED
--- Comment #8 from Maci
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21375
Maciej W. Rozycki changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
--
You are receiving th
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21375
Maciej W. Rozycki changed:
What|Removed |Added
Depends on||19818
Referenced Bugs:
https://
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21375
--- Comment #1 from Maciej W. Rozycki ---
The corresponding GNU dynamic loader issue is preexisting PR 19818, now
updated accordingly.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
__
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20402
Maciej W. Rozycki changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ma...@linux-mips.org
--
You are
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20402
--- Comment #6 from Maciej W. Rozycki ---
See also PR 19818, for the corresponding GNU dynamic loader issue.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
bug-binu
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21086
ma.jiang at zte dot com.cn changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ma.jiang at zte dot com.cn
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21086
ma.jiang at zte dot com.cn changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ma.jiang at zte dot com.cn
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21086
ma.jiang at zte dot com.cn changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ma.jiang at zte dot com.cn
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21086
ma.jiang at zte dot com.cn changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ma.jiang at zte dot com.cn
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21086
--- Comment #5 from ma.jiang at zte dot com.cn ---
Hi guys,
I encoutered this bug when trying to compile a static-linked perf. In my
option, there were two serious problem here.
First of all, ld should never create a broken executable sile
23 matches
Mail list logo
