Hi Peter,
gcc -c -O1 -ggdb -masm=intel -Wa,-acdhlgn=gfp_library.lst -Wa,--
listing-lhs-width=4,--listing-rhs-width=132 -o gfp_library.o
gfp_library.c
In the future if you have other bugs like this to report, please
could you capture the compiler's assembler output and provide that
as the test
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32211
--- Comment #13 from Dan McDonald ---
(In reply to Nick Clifton from comment #12)
> Hi Dan,
>
> I do not know if it will help, but you can work around the problem by using
> the -j option to explicitly request the disassembly of the sections
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32211
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |WAITING
--- Comment #5 from H.J. Lu ---
Wh
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32211
--- Comment #6 from Dan McDonald ---
root@ubuntu-22:~# cat x.s
.text
foo:
.zero 10
mov %eax, %ebx
root@ubuntu-22:~# gcc -c x.s
root@ubuntu-22:~# file x.o
x.o: ELF 64-bit LSB relocatable, x86-64, version 1 (SYSV), not st
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32211
--- Comment #12 from Nick Clifton ---
Hi Dan,
Sorry, you are right, I was wrong. And now that I understand the problem I
have been able to track down the exact commit that causes this issue:
0a3137ce4c4b
Which states:
There is some inc
Dear,
compiling the attached example fails with this error message:
*** buffer overflow detected ***: terminated
/tmp/ccyb3JRr.s: Assembler messages:
/tmp/ccyb3JRr.s: Internal error (Aborted).
Please report this bug.
Environment:
$ uname -a
Linux gygv 6.10.10-200.fc40.x86_64 #1 SMP PREEMPT_DYN
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32211
Nick Clifton changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||nickc at redhat dot com
--- Comment #7
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32211
--- Comment #9 from Dan McDonald ---
Adding a tiny C program and an a.out it generated on the Ubuntu 22 box I've
been using to further demonstrate on a smaller level.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32211
--- Comment #11 from Dan McDonald ---
Created attachment 15719
--> https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=15719&action=edit
a.out from the C program, compiled on Ubuntu 22
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the C
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32211
--- Comment #10 from Dan McDonald ---
Created attachment 15718
--> https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=15718&action=edit
Small C program that could compile an object with the same properties as the
big .a files.
--
You are re
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32211
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |NEW
--- Comment #4 from H.J. Lu ---
[hjl@g
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32191
--- Comment #1 from Sourceware Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by H.J. Lu :
https://sourceware.org/git/gitweb.cgi?p=binutils-gdb.git;h=052940eba6fcd2b9f359f03ee205e9cd4dfb1575
commit 052940eba6fcd2b9f359f03ee205e9cd4dfb1575
Au
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32211
--- Comment #8 from Dan McDonald ---
Nope. -w was intentional. it's the v8dbg_SmiTag symbol that's getting set to
0 and getting ignored. The v8dbg_SmiTagMask is set to 0x1 and is not.
Something changed between 2.40 and 2.41 as far as I can
Hello Nick,
I found the e-mail address on an old binutils doc page, and
unfortunately I didn't realize how old it was. But true, the current
doc page address is present in the rpm info, next time I will register.
I wanted to know how exactly gcc translates such expressions like
n * 0x1001. People
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32211
--- Comment #15 from Dan McDonald ---
1.) Thank you for confirming there was a doc update and I should've RTFM more
carefully. There's a philosophical argument about surprising chnages, but
given the next item I'm not going to raise a stink.
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32211
--- Comment #14 from Nick Clifton ---
(In reply to Dan McDonald from comment #13)
> Did this change in 2.41 include updates in the man page or other user
> documentation? If so, sorry for missing it.
Yes. It includes this change to the binu
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32207
--- Comment #1 from Sourceware Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Vladimir Mezentsev
:
https://sourceware.org/git/gitweb.cgi?p=binutils-gdb.git;h=519aef2dae56a3b71016ed3a39929f59e3a0955a
commit 519aef2dae56a3b71016ed3a39929f59
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32219
Bug ID: 32219
Summary: ELF orphan placement doesn't work well without .interp
Product: binutils
Version: 2.44 (HEAD)
Status: NEW
Severity: normal
Priority: P2
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32207
Vladimir Mezentsev changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|NEW
19 matches
Mail list logo
