[Bug gas/22553] .largecomm, .lbss, .ldata, and .lrodata are still not documented after many, many years

2018-01-18 Thread john at buu dot ac.th
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22553 --- Comment #9 from john at buu dot ac.th --- Are you telling me with a streight face to go to your proprietary competitor's documentation for an antique and dead operating system to learn about Linux when you are working for the acknowledged p

[Bug ld/22721] [2.30, 2.31 regression] Solaris/x86 TLS transition failures with linker plugin

2018-01-18 Thread ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22721 --- Comment #2 from Rainer Orth --- > --- Comment #1 from H.J. Lu --- > A couple questions: > > 1. Do all tests under ld/testsuite/ld-i386 pass on Solaris? No, but that's a preexisting condition: FAIL: Build libno-plt-1b.so FAIL: No PLT (dy

[Bug ld/22727] New: [2.30, 2.31 regression] Thousands of EH-related execution failures on Solaris/SPARC

2018-01-18 Thread ro at gcc dot gnu.org
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22727 Bug ID: 22727 Summary: [2.30, 2.31 regression] Thousands of EH-related execution failures on Solaris/SPARC Product: binutils Version: 2.31 (HEAD) Status: NEW

[Bug ld/22721] [2.30, 2.31 regression] Solaris/x86 TLS transition failures with linker plugin

2018-01-18 Thread hjl.tools at gmail dot com
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22721 --- Comment #3 from H.J. Lu --- (In reply to Rainer Orth from comment #2) > > --- Comment #1 from H.J. Lu --- > > A couple questions: > > > > 1. Do all tests under ld/testsuite/ld-i386 pass on Solaris? > > No, but that's a preexisting condit

[Bug ld/22727] [2.30, 2.31 regression] Thousands of EH-related execution failures on Solaris/SPARC

2018-01-18 Thread hjl.tools at gmail dot com
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22727 H.J. Lu changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |WAITING CC|

[Bug ld/22727] [2.30, 2.31 regression] Thousands of EH-related execution failures on Solaris/SPARC

2018-01-18 Thread ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22727 --- Comment #2 from Rainer Orth --- > --- Comment #1 from H.J. Lu --- > Does Linux/Sparc work? Are there any regressions in binutils I've no idea and no way to test. > testsuite on Solaris/Sparc? That will take a bit to determine: I'll ne

[Bug ld/22727] [2.30, 2.31 regression] Thousands of EH-related execution failures on Solaris/SPARC

2018-01-18 Thread hjl.tools at gmail dot com
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22727 --- Comment #3 from H.J. Lu --- This could be a dup of PR 22721. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ bug-binutils mailing list bug-binutils@gnu.org https

[Bug ld/22727] [2.30, 2.31 regression] Thousands of EH-related execution failures on Solaris/SPARC

2018-01-18 Thread ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22727 Eric Botcazou changed: What|Removed |Added CC||ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comm

[Bug ld/22727] [2.30, 2.31 regression] Thousands of EH-related execution failures on Solaris/SPARC

2018-01-18 Thread ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22727 --- Comment #5 from Eric Botcazou --- > Does Linux/Sparc work? Are there any regressions in binutils > testsuite on Solaris/Sparc? On SPARC64/Linux: binutils & gas testsuite clean, ld testsuite as follows: === ld Summary ===

[Bug ld/22727] [2.30, 2.31 regression] Thousands of EH-related execution failures on Solaris/SPARC

2018-01-18 Thread ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22727 --- Comment #6 from Eric Botcazou --- > Does Linux/Sparc work? Are there any regressions in binutils > testsuite on Solaris/Sparc? The EH failures are also present on SPARC64/Linux with GCC 7.3RC1 and binutils 2.30, whereas they are _not_ pr

[Bug ld/22727] [2.30, 2.31 regression] Thousands of EH-related execution failures on Solaris/SPARC

2018-01-18 Thread hjl.tools at gmail dot com
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22727 --- Comment #7 from H.J. Lu --- (In reply to Eric Botcazou from comment #6) > > Does Linux/Sparc work? Are there any regressions in binutils > > testsuite on Solaris/Sparc? > > The EH failures are also present on SPARC64/Linux with GCC 7.3RC

[Bug ld/22727] [2.30, 2.31 regression] Thousands of EH-related execution failures on SPARC

2018-01-18 Thread ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22727 Eric Botcazou changed: What|Removed |Added Target|sparc-sun-solaris2.11 |sparc*-*-* Host|sparc-s

[Bug ld/22728] New: Incorrect local symbols generated on Solaris

2018-01-18 Thread hjl.tools at gmail dot com
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22728 Bug ID: 22728 Summary: Incorrect local symbols generated on Solaris Product: binutils Version: 2.31 (HEAD) Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: P2 Component

[Bug ld/22728] Incorrect local dynamic symbols generated on Solaris

2018-01-18 Thread hjl.tools at gmail dot com
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22728 H.J. Lu changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|Incorrect local symbols |Incorrect local dynamic |

[Bug binutils/15891] ia64, ld segfault on --as-needed

2018-01-18 Thread jason.duerstock at gmail dot com
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=15891 Jason Duerstock changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jason.duerstock at gmail dot com -

[Bug binutils/15891] ia64, ld segfault on --as-needed

2018-01-18 Thread jason.duerstock at gmail dot com
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=15891 --- Comment #3 from Jason Duerstock --- Created attachment 10753 --> https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=10753&action=edit backtrace and stack variables Here is the gdb info I attached to the Debian bug. -- You are receiving

[Bug ld/22727] [2.30, 2.31 regression] Thousands of EH-related execution failures on SPARC

2018-01-18 Thread ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22727 --- Comment #8 from Eric Botcazou --- > This implies that ld testsuite coverage in binutils for Sparc is very > poor. Can you extract some ld tesctcases from GCC tests? Are gcc.dg/torture/tls/run-gd.c or gcc.dg/torture/tls/run-ld.c good enou

[Bug ld/22727] [2.30, 2.31 regression] Thousands of EH-related execution failures on SPARC

2018-01-18 Thread hjl.tools at gmail dot com
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22727 --- Comment #9 from H.J. Lu --- (In reply to Eric Botcazou from comment #8) > > This implies that ld testsuite coverage in binutils for Sparc is very > > poor. Can you extract some ld tesctcases from GCC tests? > > Are gcc.dg/torture/tls/run

[Bug ld/22729] New: FAIL: pr20995-2

2018-01-18 Thread hjl.tools at gmail dot com
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22729 Bug ID: 22729 Summary: FAIL: pr20995-2 Product: binutils Version: 2.31 (HEAD) Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: P2 Component: ld Assignee: unas

[Bug ld/22727] [2.30, 2.31 regression] Thousands of EH-related execution failures on SPARC

2018-01-18 Thread hjl.tools at gmail dot com
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22727 --- Comment #10 from H.J. Lu --- This could be a dup of PR 22728. Please try https://sourceware.org/ml/binutils/2018-01/msg00278.html -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. _

[Bug ld/22727] [2.30, 2.31 regression] Thousands of EH-related execution failures on SPARC

2018-01-18 Thread hjl.tools at gmail dot com
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22727 --- Comment #11 from H.J. Lu --- (In reply to Eric Botcazou from comment #8) > > This implies that ld testsuite coverage in binutils for Sparc is very > > poor. Can you extract some ld tesctcases from GCC tests? > > Are gcc.dg/torture/tls/ru

[Bug ld/15891] ia64, ld segfault on --as-needed

2018-01-18 Thread malat at debian dot org
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=15891 Mathieu Malaterre changed: What|Removed |Added Component|binutils|ld -- You are receiving this mai

[Bug ld/15891] ia64, ld segfault on --as-needed

2018-01-18 Thread slyfox at inbox dot ru
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=15891 Sergei Trofimovich changed: What|Removed |Added CC||slyfox at inbox dot ru -- You a

[Bug binutils/21732] String-concatenated message can not be translated

2018-01-18 Thread goeran at uddeborg dot se
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21732 Göran Uddeborg changed: What|Removed |Added Status|RESOLVED|VERIFIED --- Comment #5 from Göran U

[Bug ld/22728] Incorrect local dynamic symbols generated on Solaris

2018-01-18 Thread cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22728 --- Comment #1 from cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org --- The master branch has been updated by H.J. Lu : https://sourceware.org/git/gitweb.cgi?p=binutils-gdb.git;h=c5bdb022609634970dd981517d478e6cc332629c commit c5bdb022609634970dd981517d478e6c

[Bug ld/22728] Incorrect local dynamic symbols generated on Solaris

2018-01-18 Thread hjl.tools at gmail dot com
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22728 H.J. Lu changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug ld/22727] [2.30, 2.31 regression] Thousands of EH-related execution failures on SPARC

2018-01-18 Thread hjl.tools at gmail dot com
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22727 --- Comment #12 from H.J. Lu --- (In reply to H.J. Lu from comment #10) > This could be a dup of PR 22728. Please try > > https://sourceware.org/ml/binutils/2018-01/msg00278.html I fixed PR 22728. Please try master branch again. -- You a

[Bug ld/22727] [2.30, 2.31 regression] Thousands of EH-related execution failures on SPARC

2018-01-18 Thread ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22727 --- Comment #13 from Eric Botcazou --- > I fixed PR 22728. Please try master branch again. How could a Solaris fix be of any help on Linux exactly? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___