Nabble - Gnu - Binutils - Bugs

[Bug gold/11025] gold failed to build on 32bit hosts

2009-11-27T08:17:51Z

------- Additional Comments From espindola at google dot com 2009-11-27 16:17 -------
fixed

--
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution| |FIXED

http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=11025

------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.

_______________________________________________
bug-binutils mailing list
bug-binutils@...
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils

[Bug gold/11025] gold failed to build on 32bit hosts

2009-11-27T08:15:53Z

------- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-11-27 16:15 -------
Subject: Bug 11025

CVSROOT: /cvs/src
Module name: src
Changes by: espindola@... 2009-11-27 16:15:26

Modified files:
gold : ChangeLog incremental-dump.cc

Log message:
2009-11-27 Rafael Avila de Espindola <espindola@...>

PR gold/11025
* incremental-dump.cc (main): Use llu to print 64 bit values.

Patches:
http://sources.redhat.com/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/src/gold/ChangeLog.diff?cvsroot=src&r1=1.363&r2=1.364
http://sources.redhat.com/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/src/gold/incremental-dump.cc.diff?cvsroot=src&r1=1.1&r2=1.2

--

http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=11025

------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.

_______________________________________________
bug-binutils mailing list
bug-binutils@...
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils

[Bug gold/11025] gold failed to build on 32bit hosts

2009-11-27T06:26:34Z

------- Additional Comments From espindola at google dot com 2009-11-27 14:26 -------
Created an attachment (id=4416)
--> (http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=4416&action=view)
proposed patch

The patch assumes long long is 64 bits, but I think the assumption exists in
other places in gold.

--

http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=11025

------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.

_______________________________________________
bug-binutils mailing list
bug-binutils@...
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils

[Bug gold/11025] gold failed to build on 32bit hosts

2009-11-26T19:46:19Z

--
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |espindola at google dot com

http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=11025

------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.

_______________________________________________
bug-binutils mailing list
bug-binutils@...
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils

[Bug gold/11025] New: gold failed to build on 32bit hosts

2009-11-26T19:03:05Z

On Linux/ia32, I got

cc1plus: warnings being treated as errors
/net/gnu-6/export/linux/src/binutils/binutils/gold/incremental-dump.cc: In
function int main(int, char**):
/net/gnu-6/export/linux/src/binutils/binutils/gold/incremental-dump.cc:151:
warning: format %ld expects type long int, but argument 2 has type long
long unsigned int
make[6]: *** [incremental-dump.o] Error 1

--
Summary: gold failed to build on 32bit hosts
Product: binutils
Version: 2.21 (HEAD)
Status: NEW
Severity: normal
Priority: P2
Component: gold
AssignedTo: ian at airs dot com
ReportedBy: hjl dot tools at gmail dot com
CC: bug-binutils at gnu dot org

http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=11025

------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.

_______________________________________________
bug-binutils mailing list
bug-binutils@...
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils

[Bug binutils/10964] objdump disassembles "lpm rX, Z" wrongly

2009-11-26T05:56:05Z

------- Additional Comments From nickc at redhat dot com 2009-11-26 13:56 -------
Hi Elrond,

> So you suggest, that this is a bug in the debian packaging?

I would have to say yes, although it does seem rather strange. Perhaps you
could try downloading a snapshot of the current development sources from here:

ftp://sourceware.org/pub/binutils/snapshots/

See if an objdump built from these sources shows the same problem.

Cheers
Nick

--

http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=10964

------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.

_______________________________________________
bug-binutils mailing list
bug-binutils@...
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils

[Bug ld/10956] Missing --no-relax option

2009-11-26T05:49:12Z

------- Additional Comments From nickc at redhat dot com 2009-11-26 13:49 -------
Hi Richard,

> Why rename it to "target_specific_optimizations"? It's still relaxation.

Because for some targets the command line option is used to enable other
optimizations, not just relaxation.

I have checked the patch in, along with the use of the new macros in the generic
ld files.

Cheers
Nick

--
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
Resolution| |FIXED

http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=10956

------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.

_______________________________________________
bug-binutils mailing list
bug-binutils@...
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils

[Bug ld/10956] Missing --no-relax option

2009-11-26T05:45:48Z

------- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-11-26 13:45 -------
Subject: Bug 10956

CVSROOT: /cvs/src
Module name: src
Changes by: nickc@... 2009-11-26 13:45:26

Modified files:
ld : ChangeLog ld.h ld.texinfo ldlang.c ldmain.c
lexsup.c
ld/emultempl : alphaelf.em avrelf.em cr16elf.em crxelf.em
mmix-elfnmmo.em needrelax.em ppc32elf.em
sh64elf.em xtensaelf.em

Log message:
PR ld/10956
* ld.h (struct args_type): Rename 'relax' field to
'disable_target_specific_optimizations' and turn it into a
tri-state variable.
(RELAXATION_DISABLED_BY_DEFAULT): New macro.
(RELAXATION_DISABLED_BY_USER): New macro.
(RELAXATION_ENABLED): New macro.
(DISABLE_RELAXATION): New macro.
(ENABLE_RELAXATION): New macro.
* lexsup (enum option_values): Add OPTION_NO_RELAX.
(struct ld_options): Add --no-relax.
(parse_args): Handle OPTION_NO_RELAX. Use DISABLE_RELAXATION and
ENABLE_RELAXATION macros.
* ldlang.c (lang_relax_sections): Use RELAXATION_ENABLED macro.
(lang_process): Likewise.
* ldmain.c (main): Initialise
disable_target_specific_optimizations field.
(multiple_definition): Use RELAXATION_ENABLED macro.
* ld.texinfo: Document new command line option.
* emultempl/alphaelf.em: Remove --no-relax option.
(before_allocation): Test RELAXATION_DISABLED_BY_USER macro.
Use ENABLE_RELAXATION macro.
* emultempl/avrelf.em: (after_allocation): Test RELAXATION_ENABLED
macro.
* emultempl/cr16elf.em: Remove --no-relax option.
(before_allocation): Test RELAXATION_DISABLED_BY_USER macro.
Use ENABLE_RELAXATION macro.
* emultempl/crxelf.em: Remove --no-relax option.
(before_allocation): Test RELAXATION_DISABLED_BY_USER macro.
Use ENABLE_RELAXATION macro.
* emultempl/mmix-elfnmmo.em: (before_allocation): Use
ENABLE_RELAXATION macro.
* emultempl/needrelax.em: (before_allocation): Use
ENABLE_RELAXATION macro.
* emultempl/ppc32elf.em: (before_allocation): Test
RELAXATION_DISABLED_BY_DEFAULT macro. Use
ENABLE_RELAXATION macro.
* emultempl/sh64elf.em: (before_allocation): Test
RELAXATION_ENABLED macro. Use DISABLE_RELAXATION macro.
* emultempl/xtensaelf.em: Remove --no-relax option.
(before_allocation): Test RELAXATION_ENABLED macro.
Use ENABLE_RELAXATION macro.

Patches:
http://sources.redhat.com/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/src/ld/ChangeLog.diff?cvsroot=src&r1=1.2085&r2=1.2086
http://sources.redhat.com/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/src/ld/ld.h.diff?cvsroot=src&r1=1.45&r2=1.46
http://sources.redhat.com/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/src/ld/ld.texinfo.diff?cvsroot=src&r1=1.254&r2=1.255
http://sources.redhat.com/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/src/ld/ldlang.c.diff?cvsroot=src&r1=1.325&r2=1.326
http://sources.redhat.com/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/src/ld/ldmain.c.diff?cvsroot=src&r1=1.141&r2=1.142
http://sources.redhat.com/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/src/ld/lexsup.c.diff?cvsroot=src&r1=1.116&r2=1.117
http://sources.redhat.com/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/src/ld/emultempl/alphaelf.em.diff?cvsroot=src&r1=1.15&r2=1.16
http://sources.redhat.com/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/src/ld/emultempl/avrelf.em.diff?cvsroot=src&r1=1.9&r2=1.10
http://sources.redhat.com/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/src/ld/emultempl/cr16elf.em.diff?cvsroot=src&r1=1.6&r2=1.7
http://sources.redhat.com/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/src/ld/emultempl/crxelf.em.diff?cvsroot=src&r1=1.7&r2=1.8
http://sources.redhat.com/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/src/ld/emultempl/mmix-elfnmmo.em.diff?cvsroot=src&r1=1.17&r2=1.18
http://sources.redhat.com/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/src/ld/emultempl/needrelax.em.diff?cvsroot=src&r1=1.8&r2=1.9
http://sources.redhat.com/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/src/ld/emultempl/ppc32elf.em.diff?cvsroot=src&r1=1.23&r2=1.24
http://sources.redhat.com/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/src/ld/emultempl/sh64elf.em.diff?cvsroot=src&r1=1.16&r2=1.17
http://sources.redhat.com/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/src/ld/emultempl/xtensaelf.em.diff?cvsroot=src&r1=1.23&r2=1.24

--

http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=10956

------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.

_______________________________________________
bug-binutils mailing list
bug-binutils@...
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils

[Bug ld/11024] -L no longer influences how ld finds linker scripts when not using -T

2009-11-25T22:35:19Z

------- Additional Comments From amodra at bigpond dot net dot au 2009-11-26 06:35 -------
No there isn't a chance of reverting this fix. Having ld search in -L paths for
scripts was a bad idea. It has resulted in a number of very confused users over
the years, who installed a new version of ld to /usr/local but were unwittingly
picking up old ld scripts when passing -L /usr/lib to ld.

--
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution| |WONTFIX

http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=11024

------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.

_______________________________________________
bug-binutils mailing list
bug-binutils@...
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils

[Bug ld/11024] New: -L no longer influences how ld finds linker scripts when not using -T

2009-11-25T18:20:15Z

The following change, between binutils 2.18 and 2.20, removed the ability of
ld's -L option to influence how linker scripts are located:
http://sourceware.org/ml/binutils-cvs/2009-04/msg00044.html
http://sourceware.org/ml/binutils/2009-04/msg00107.html

As far as I can tell, there is no longer a way to add to the search path for
finding (for example) ldscripts/elf_i386.x, ldscripts/elf_i386.xs etc.

The -T option is not a very good substitute because it only supplies a fixed
linker script. When using -T, the linker will not choose between scripts
according to whether an executable is being linked (elf_i386.x) or a library is
being linked (elf_i386.xs), which it would do using -L.

This is a partial regression. I say partial because in the past I had to
disable binutils' compiling-in of linker scripts in order to use -L this way.
(See
http://repo.or.cz/w/nacl-binutils.git/commit/885d51de41658d6752f28c0c4c2dca56cb5e4c1c)

Is there any chance of reverting this change? I don't really understand why the
change was made given that it makes ld less flexible.

--
Summary: -L no longer influences how ld finds linker scripts when
not using -T
Product: binutils
Version: 2.20
Status: NEW
Severity: normal
Priority: P2
Component: ld
AssignedTo: unassigned at sources dot redhat dot com
ReportedBy: mrs at mythic-beasts dot com
CC: bug-binutils at gnu dot org

http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=11024

------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.

_______________________________________________
bug-binutils mailing list
bug-binutils@...
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils

[Bug binutils/11017] PAGE_SIZE redefined in dlltool.c

2009-11-25T04:44:40Z

------- Additional Comments From jerker dot back at gmail dot com 2009-11-25 12:44 -------
(In reply to comment #1)
> Random comment coming out of the woodwork:
> I can't help thinking that you should change this and all uses to
> TARGET_PAGE_SIZE and TARGET_PAGE_MASK, and the problem would probably be
solved.
> If you *really* need the host page size...no you don't.

That is an idea. TARGET_PAGE_SIZE=0x1000 is set by all targets using dlltool
(AFAICS), but it is defined by the ld/emulparams scripts and used only in ld
scripts. BTW HOST is TARGET, although dlltool is not currently used by
Interix. It favours its own PE shared library solution.

--

http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=11017

------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.

_______________________________________________
bug-binutils mailing list
bug-binutils@...
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils

[Bug gold/11019] New: Xindex::initialize_symtab_xindex in object.cc is not instantiated

2009-11-25T02:26:08Z

It become inlined into Sized_relobj::do_initialize_xindex when compiling with
-O3. But initialize_symtab_xindex is also used by
Sized_dynobj::do_initialize_xindex in dynobj.cc. This causes undefined reference
errors.

--
Summary: Xindex::initialize_symtab_xindex in object.cc is not
instantiated
Product: binutils
Version: 2.21 (HEAD)
Status: NEW
Severity: normal
Priority: P2
Component: gold
AssignedTo: ian at airs dot com
ReportedBy: d dot g dot gorbachev at gmail dot com
CC: bug-binutils at gnu dot org

http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=11019

------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.

_______________________________________________
bug-binutils mailing list
bug-binutils@...
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils

[Bug binutils/11014] PAGE_SIZE redefined in dlltool.c

2009-11-24T13:42:15Z

------- Additional Comments From schwab at linux-m68k dot org 2009-11-24 21:42 -------

*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 11017 ***

--
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution| |DUPLICATE

http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=11014

------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.

_______________________________________________
bug-binutils mailing list
bug-binutils@...
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils

[Bug binutils/11017] PAGE_SIZE redefined in dlltool.c

2009-11-24T13:42:15Z

------- Additional Comments From schwab at linux-m68k dot org 2009-11-24 21:42 -------
*** Bug 11014 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

--

http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=11017

------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.

_______________________________________________
bug-binutils mailing list
bug-binutils@...
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils

[Bug binutils/11016] PAGE_SIZE redefined in dlltool.c

2009-11-24T13:41:16Z

------- Additional Comments From hp at sourceware dot org 2009-11-24 21:41 -------

*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 11017 ***

--
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution| |DUPLICATE

http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=11016

------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.

_______________________________________________
bug-binutils mailing list
bug-binutils@...
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils

[Bug binutils/11017] PAGE_SIZE redefined in dlltool.c

2009-11-24T13:41:16Z

------- Additional Comments From hp at sourceware dot org 2009-11-24 21:41 -------
*** Bug 11016 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

--

http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=11017

------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.

_______________________________________________
bug-binutils mailing list
bug-binutils@...
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils

[Bug binutils/11017] PAGE_SIZE redefined in dlltool.c

2009-11-24T13:39:56Z

------- Additional Comments From hp at sourceware dot org 2009-11-24 21:39 -------
Random comment coming out of the woodwork:
I can't help thinking that you should change this and all uses to
TARGET_PAGE_SIZE and TARGET_PAGE_MASK, and the problem would probably be solved.
If you *really* need the host page size...no you don't.

--

http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=11017

------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.

_______________________________________________
bug-binutils mailing list
bug-binutils@...
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils

[Bug binutils/11017] New: PAGE_SIZE redefined in dlltool.c

2009-11-24T13:24:00Z

dlltool.c(244) defines PAGE_SIZE

The PAGE_SIZE symbol is/should be defined in limits.h on a POSIX system (see
http://www.opengroup.org). NT POSIX subsystem (SUA) defines it to 0x10000
(10*0x1000). In my headers PAGE_SIZE is defined as an enum and dlltool.c
generates a compiler error due to PAGE_SIZE is defined before including system
headers.

I need advise how to fix this.
Assuming setting PAGE_SIZE to 0x1000 is preferable, we can let dlltool.c set an
explicit value after including the system headers, like this:

Index: dlltool.c
===================================================================
RCS file: /cvs/src/src/binutils/dlltool.c,v
retrieving revision 1.97
diff -d -u -p -r1.97 dlltool.c
--- dlltool.c 28 Oct 2009 17:21:36 -0000 1.97
+++ dlltool.c 24 Nov 2009 17:27:50 -0000
@@ -241,9 +241,6 @@

#define show_allnames 0

-#define PAGE_SIZE ((bfd_vma) 4096)
-#define PAGE_MASK ((bfd_vma) (-4096))
-
#include "sysdep.h"
#include "bfd.h"
#include "libiberty.h"
@@ -259,6 +256,9 @@
#include <stdarg.h>
#include <assert.h>

+#define PAGE_SIZE ((bfd_vma) 4096)
+#define PAGE_MASK ((bfd_vma) (-4096))
+

--
Summary: PAGE_SIZE redefined in dlltool.c
Product: binutils
Version: 2.21 (HEAD)
Status: NEW
Severity: normal
Priority: P2
Component: binutils
AssignedTo: unassigned at sources dot redhat dot com
ReportedBy: jerker dot back at gmail dot com
CC: bug-binutils at gnu dot org
GCC build triplet: x86_64-unknown-interix6.1
GCC host triplet: x86_64-unknown-interix6.1
GCC target triplet: x86_64-unknown-interix6.1

http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=11017

------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.

_______________________________________________
bug-binutils mailing list
bug-binutils@...
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils

[Bug binutils/11016] New: PAGE_SIZE redefined in dlltool.c

2009-11-24T13:23:45Z

dlltool.c(244) defines PAGE_SIZE

The PAGE_SIZE symbol is/should be defined in limits.h on a POSIX system (see
http://www.opengroup.org). NT POSIX subsystem (SUA) defines it to 0x10000
(10*0x1000). In my headers PAGE_SIZE is defined as an enum and dlltool.c
generates a compiler error due to PAGE_SIZE is defined before including system
headers.

I need advise how to fix this.
Assuming setting PAGE_SIZE to 0x1000 is preferable, we can let dlltool.c set an
explicit value after including the system headers, like this:

Index: dlltool.c
===================================================================
RCS file: /cvs/src/src/binutils/dlltool.c,v
retrieving revision 1.97
diff -d -u -p -r1.97 dlltool.c
--- dlltool.c 28 Oct 2009 17:21:36 -0000 1.97
+++ dlltool.c 24 Nov 2009 17:27:50 -0000
@@ -241,9 +241,6 @@

#define show_allnames 0

-#define PAGE_SIZE ((bfd_vma) 4096)
-#define PAGE_MASK ((bfd_vma) (-4096))
-
#include "sysdep.h"
#include "bfd.h"
#include "libiberty.h"
@@ -259,6 +256,9 @@
#include <stdarg.h>
#include <assert.h>

+#define PAGE_SIZE ((bfd_vma) 4096)
+#define PAGE_MASK ((bfd_vma) (-4096))
+

--
Summary: PAGE_SIZE redefined in dlltool.c
Product: binutils
Version: 2.21 (HEAD)
Status: NEW
Severity: normal
Priority: P2
Component: binutils
AssignedTo: unassigned at sources dot redhat dot com
ReportedBy: jerker dot back at gmail dot com
CC: bug-binutils at gnu dot org
GCC build triplet: x86_64-unknown-interix6.1
GCC host triplet: x86_64-unknown-interix6.1
GCC target triplet: x86_64-unknown-interix6.1

http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=11016

------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.

_______________________________________________
bug-binutils mailing list
bug-binutils@...
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils

[Bug ld/10144] mips/ld: non-dynamic relocations refer to dynamic symbol

2009-11-24T11:34:13Z

------- Additional Comments From rsandifo at nildram dot co dot uk 2009-11-24 19:34 -------
The problem is that the .debug_info section in thr-objc_gc.o references
thread_cancel. How did you compile that file?

--
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |rsandifo at nildram dot co
| |dot uk

http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=10144

------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.

_______________________________________________
bug-binutils mailing list
bug-binutils@...
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils

[Bug binutils/11014] New: PAGE_SIZE redefined in dlltool.c

2009-11-24T09:37:09Z

dlltool.c(244) defines PAGE_SIZE

The PAGE_SIZE symbol is/should be defined in limits.h on a POSIX system (see
http://www.opengroup.org). NT POSIX subsystem (SUA) defines it to 0x10000
(10*0x1000). In my headers PAGE_SIZE is defined as an enum and dlltool.c
generates a compiler error due to PAGE_SIZE is defined before including system
headers.

I need advise how to fix this.
Assuming setting PAGE_SIZE to 0x1000 is preferable, we can let dlltool.c set an
explicit value after including the system headers, like this:

Index: dlltool.c
===================================================================
RCS file: /cvs/src/src/binutils/dlltool.c,v
retrieving revision 1.97
diff -d -u -p -r1.97 dlltool.c
--- dlltool.c 28 Oct 2009 17:21:36 -0000 1.97
+++ dlltool.c 24 Nov 2009 17:27:50 -0000
@@ -241,9 +241,6 @@

#define show_allnames 0

-#define PAGE_SIZE ((bfd_vma) 4096)
-#define PAGE_MASK ((bfd_vma) (-4096))
-
#include "sysdep.h"
#include "bfd.h"
#include "libiberty.h"
@@ -259,6 +256,9 @@
#include <stdarg.h>
#include <assert.h>

+#define PAGE_SIZE ((bfd_vma) 4096)
+#define PAGE_MASK ((bfd_vma) (-4096))
+

--
Summary: PAGE_SIZE redefined in dlltool.c
Product: binutils
Version: 2.21 (HEAD)
Status: NEW
Severity: normal
Priority: P2
Component: binutils
AssignedTo: unassigned at sources dot redhat dot com
ReportedBy: jerker dot back at gmail dot com
CC: bug-binutils at gnu dot org
GCC build triplet: x86_64-unknown-interix6.1
GCC host triplet: x86_64-unknown-interix6.1
GCC target triplet: x86_64-unknown-interix6.1

http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=11014

------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.

_______________________________________________
bug-binutils mailing list
bug-binutils@...
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils

[Bug ld/10956] Missing --no-relax option

2009-11-24T08:17:37Z

------- Additional Comments From rth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-11-24 16:17 -------
- bfd_boolean relax;
+ signed int disable_target_specific_optimizations;

Why rename it to "target_specific_optimizations"? It's still relaxation.
I do like the macros though. You could stand to use them in the main ld
files as well as the target files.

The patch otherwise looks much better.

--

http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=10956

------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.

_______________________________________________
bug-binutils mailing list
bug-binutils@...
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils

[Bug ld/10956] Missing --no-relax option

2009-11-24T07:16:06Z

------- Additional Comments From nickc at redhat dot com 2009-11-24 15:16 -------
Hi Richard,

How about this patch ?

Cheers
Nick

--
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|NEW |WAITING

http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=10956

------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.

_______________________________________________
bug-binutils mailing list
bug-binutils@...
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils

[Bug ld/10956] Missing --no-relax option

2009-11-24T07:15:23Z

------- Additional Comments From nickc at redhat dot com 2009-11-24 15:15 -------
Created an attachment (id=4414)
--> (http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=4414&action=view)
Implement --no-relax as a generic linker command line option

--

http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=10956

------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.

_______________________________________________
bug-binutils mailing list
bug-binutils@...
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils

[Bug gas/11013] New: Incorrect Thumb2 encoding for saturating addition and subtraction

2009-11-24T03:25:09Z

The following code produces incorrect op-codes:

@ start
.syntax unified
.thumb

qadd r1,r2,r3
qdadd r1,r2,r3
qsub r1,r2,r3
qdsub r1,r2,r3
@ finish

gas gives

FA82F183
FA82F193
FA82F1A3
FA82F1B3

whereas it should give

FA83F182
FA83F192
FA83F1A2
FA83F1B2

--
Summary: Incorrect Thumb2 encoding for saturating addition and
subtraction
Product: binutils
Version: 2.20
Status: NEW
Severity: normal
Priority: P2
Component: gas
AssignedTo: unassigned at sources dot redhat dot com
ReportedBy: anthony dot fox at cl dot cam dot ac dot uk
CC: bug-binutils at gnu dot org
GCC host triplet: i386-redhat-linux
GCC target triplet: arm-elf

http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=11013

------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.

_______________________________________________
bug-binutils mailing list
bug-binutils@...
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils

[Bug ld/11012] New: -Wl, -z, nocombreloc doesn't work with IRELATIVE relocations

2009-11-24T02:35:06Z

All prelink ifunc* tests fail on powerpc64 when doing make check-cycle
(in the pass with -Wl,-z,nocombreloc). The failures are in all ld.so modes, ldd
-d -r ./ifunc1lib1.so, LD_TRACE_PRELINKING=1 ./ld64.so.1 ./ifunc1lib1.so or
when just doing ./ld64.so.1 ./ifunc1lib1.so, even without prelinking being done
on the library or any other involved object.
The problem is that powerpc64 dl-machine.h assumes that if map == sym_map, then
relative relocations for the current library have been already processed, but
that isn't necessarily the case with -Wl,-z,nocombreloc.

Not sure what can be done about this though, perhaps linker could enforce some
ordering of .rela.* sections which would make sure the needed relative
relocations are processed before the IRELATIVE/JMP_IREL ones. Looking at
ifunc1lib1.so it would be perhaps enough to force .rela.opd to be emitted as the
first .rela.* section.

--
Summary: -Wl,-z,nocombreloc doesn't work with IRELATIVE
relocations
Product: binutils
Version: unspecified
Status: NEW
Severity: normal
Priority: P2
Component: ld
AssignedTo: unassigned at sources dot redhat dot com
ReportedBy: jakub at redhat dot com
CC: amodra at bigpond dot net dot au,bug-binutils at gnu dot
org
GCC target triplet: powerpc64-linux

http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=11012

------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.

_______________________________________________
bug-binutils mailing list
bug-binutils@...
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils

[Bug gas/11011] New: gas/config/tc-arm.c:2489: error: suggest braces around empty body in an 'if' statement

2009-11-24T01:05:34Z

OS: Windows XP (cygwin)
GCC: 4.4.2

configure args: ../../src/binutils-2.20/configure --target=arm-elf
--prefix=/opt/arm --enable-interwork --enable-multilib

these configure args are recommended at http://www.gnuarm.com/support.html#build

Buld log (after the second "make", the first was "make -j3" so logs are interlaced):

make[4]: Entering directory `/cygdrive/d/GNU/build-arm/binutils-2.20/gas'
gcc -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -I../../../src/binutils-2.20/gas -I.
-I../../../src/binutils-2.20/gas -I../bfd
-I../../../src/binutils-2.20/gas/config
-I../../../src/binutils-2.20/gas/../include -I../../../src/binutils-2.20/gas/..
-I../../../src/binutils-2.20/gas/../bfd -DLOCALEDIR="\"/opt/arm/share/locale\""
-W -Wall -Wstrict-prototypes -Wmissing-prototypes -Werror -g -O2 -MT tc-arm.o
-MD -MP -MF .deps/tc-arm.Tpo -c -o tc-arm.o `test -f 'config/tc-arm.c' || echo
'../../../src/binutils-2.20/gas/'`config/tc-arm.c
cc1: warnings being treated as errors
../../../src/binutils-2.20/gas/config/tc-arm.c: In function 'make_mapping_symbol':
../../../src/binutils-2.20/gas/config/tc-arm.c:2489: error: suggest braces
around empty body in an 'if' statement

--
Summary: gas/config/tc-arm.c:2489: error: suggest braces around
empty body in an 'if' statement
Product: binutils
Version: 2.20
Status: NEW
Severity: normal
Priority: P2
Component: gas
AssignedTo: unassigned at sources dot redhat dot com
ReportedBy: jksgfv at tut dot by
CC: bug-binutils at gnu dot org

http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=11011

------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.

_______________________________________________
bug-binutils mailing list
bug-binutils@...
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils

Re: Error while compiling Binutils-2.20

2009-11-23T17:21:53Z

Nick Clifton wrote:

Hi Marco,

> libtool: link: ar rc .libs/libbfd.a archive.o archures.o bfd.o bfdio.o bfdwin.o cache.o coffgen.o corefile.o format.o init.o libbfd.o opncls.o reloc.o section.o syms.o targets.o hash.o linker.o srec.o binary.o tekhex.o ihex.o stabs.o stab-syms.o merge.o dwarf2.o simple.o compress.o verilog.o elf32-i386.o elf-ifunc.o elf-vxworks.o elf32.o elf.o elflink.o elf-attrs.o elf-strtab.o elf-eh-frame.o dwarf1.o i386linux.o aout32.o pei-i386.o peigen.o cofflink.o elf32-gen.o cpu-i386.o trad-core.o
> ar: symbol lookup error: ar: undefined symbol: bfd_plugin_set_program_name

I tried to reproduce this problem, but failed. :-(

The bfd_plugin_set_program_name symbol is defined in plugin.o which
should be included in the libbfd.a library mentioned above. Can you
check to see if it is there, or if the bfd/plugin.c file was
mis-compiled somehow ?

Cheers
Nick

_______________________________________________
bug-binutils mailing list
bug-binutils@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils

I also met this problem, hope some guy can help !!!

BillZ

[Bug binutils/11003] arm-elf-objdump gives format not recognized with this elf-formatted file

2009-11-23T13:05:34Z

------- Additional Comments From amodra at bigpond dot net dot au 2009-11-23 21:05 -------
Your accept.ox is broken. It has a REL section with entsize of 12 which is the
size for a RELA section.

--
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution| |INVALID

http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=11003

------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.

_______________________________________________
bug-binutils mailing list
bug-binutils@...
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils

[Bug ld/11006] New: A "relaxed" link order of libraries is requested for improved compatibilty

2009-11-23T11:45:55Z

The GNU ld linker requires the user to specify libraries after any object
files which use them. For example:

$ cat main.c
void sub();
main() {
sub();
}
$ gcc -c sub.c
$ ar rv libsub.a sub.o
ar: creating libsub.a
a - sub.o
$ gcc -L . -lsub main.c ### FAILS !!!
/tmp/cccN9Qxp.o: In function `main':
main.c:(.text+0xa): undefined reference to `sub'
collect2: ld returned 1 exit status
$ gcc main.c -L . -lsub ### WORKS !!!
$

The linking order requirement is not needed by AIX, so this has been an issue
for users migrating from an AIX system to Linux. This enhancement bug is being
submitted for the benefit of these users.

---------------------

I am aware of the following workaround:

$ gcc -Wl,--start -lsub -L. main.c -Wl,--end
$

--
Summary: A "relaxed" link order of libraries is requested for
improved compatibilty
Product: binutils
Version: 2.16
Status: NEW
Severity: enhancement
Priority: P2
Component: ld
AssignedTo: unassigned at sources dot redhat dot com
ReportedBy: geir at cray dot com
CC: bug-binutils at gnu dot org

http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=11006

------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.

_______________________________________________
bug-binutils mailing list
bug-binutils@...
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils

[Bug binutils/11003] arm-elf-objdump gives format not recognized with this elf-formatted file

2009-11-23T09:32:12Z

------- Additional Comments From ben dot baron at sun dot com 2009-11-23 17:32 -------
Files are now attached. Please let me know if I can provide other details.

--
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Summary|arm-elf-objdump gives format|arm-elf-objdump gives format
|not recognized with this |not recognized with this
|elf-formatted file |elf-formatted file

http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=11003

------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.

_______________________________________________
bug-binutils mailing list
bug-binutils@...
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils

[Bug binutils/11003] arm-elf-objdump gives format not recognized with this elf-formatted file

2009-11-23T09:30:22Z

------- Additional Comments From ben dot baron at sun dot com 2009-11-23 17:30 -------
Created an attachment (id=4410)
--> (http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=4410&action=view)
accept.ox - file under test - fails with "File format not recognized"

--

http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=11003

------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.

_______________________________________________
bug-binutils mailing list
bug-binutils@...
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils

[Bug binutils/11003] arm-elf-objdump gives format not recognized with this elf-formatted file

2009-11-23T09:25:59Z

------- Additional Comments From ben dot baron at sun dot com 2009-11-23 17:25 -------
Created an attachment (id=4409)
--> (http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=4409&action=view)
cross-compiled version of objdump from 2.20 binutils

--

http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=11003

------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.

_______________________________________________
bug-binutils mailing list
bug-binutils@...
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils

[Bug binutils/11003] New: arm-elf-objdump gives format not recognized with this elf-formatted file

2009-11-23T09:24:14Z

on
SunOS ttuff 5.10 Generic_138888-08 sun4v sparc SUNW,Sun-Fire-T200
with binutils 2.20, cross-compiler version of binutils (--target=arm-elf) the
below file (which is verified to be linkable) gets:

/proj/vulture/wrk/baronbj/../tools/bin/arm-elf-objdump: accept.o: File format
not recognized

I include a hexdump of the object file below. Please let me know if there is a
way to send the binary version so you can retest.

----------------- accept.o hexdump -----------------------
00000000: 7f 45 4c 46, 01 02 01 00, 00 00 00 00, 00 00 00 00 ;.ELF............
00000010: 00 01 00 28, 00 00 00 01, 00 00 00 00, 00 00 00 00 ;...(............
00000020: 00 00 01 60, 00 00 00 00, 00 34 00 00, 00 00 00 28 ;...`.....4.....(
00000030: 00 05 00 01, 00 00 00 00, 43 24 24 63, 6f 64 65 00 ;........C$$code.
00000040: 73 63 5f 61, 63 63 65 70, 74 00 63 70, 75 5f 69 6e ;sc_accept.cpu_in
00000050: 74 65 72 72, 75 70 74 5f, 64 69 73 61, 62 6c 65 00 ;terrupt_disable.
00000060: 63 70 75 5f, 69 6e 74 65, 72 72 75 70, 74 5f 72 65 ;cpu_interrupt_re
00000070: 73 74 6f 72, 65 00 4c 69, 62 24 24 52, 65 71 75 65 ;store.Lib$$Reque
00000080: 73 74 24 24, 61 72 6d 6c, 69 62 24 24, 5f 63 2e 33 ;st$$armlib$$_c.3
00000090: 32 62 00 2e, 73 74 72 74, 61 62 00 2e, 73 79 6d 74 ;2b..strtab..symt
000000a0: 61 62 00 2e, 72 65 6c 43, 24 24 63 6f, 64 65 00 00 ;ab..relC$$code..
000000b0: 00 00 00 00, 00 00 00 00, 00 00 00 00, 00 00 00 00 ;................
000000c0: 00 00 00 04, 00 00 00 00, 00 00 00 40, 03 00 00 03 ;...........@....
000000d0: 00 00 00 0c, 00 00 00 00, 00 00 00 00, 12 00 00 03 ;................
000000e0: 00 00 00 16, 00 00 00 00, 00 00 00 00, 11 00 00 00 ;................
000000f0: 00 00 00 2c, 00 00 00 00, 00 00 00 00, 11 00 00 00 ;...,............
00000100: 00 00 00 42, 00 00 00 00, 00 00 00 00, 10 00 ff f1 ;...B..........ÿñ
00000110: e1 a0 c0 0d, e9 2d d8 70, e2 4c b0 04, e1 a0 40 00 ;á À.é-ØpâL°.á @.
00000120: e1 a0 50 01, eb ff ff f9, e3 a0 10 00, e5 94 60 00 ;á P.ëÿÿùã ..å.`.
00000130: e5 84 10 00, eb ff ff f5, e3 36 00 00, 03 a0 00 0b ;å...ëÿÿõã6... ..
00000140: 13 a0 00 00, e5 85 00 00, e1 a0 00 06, e9 1b a8 70 ;. ..å...á ..é.¨p
00000150: 00 00 00 14, 00 00 03 fb, 00 00 00 24, 00 00 04 fb ;.......û...$...û
00000160: 00 00 00 00, 00 00 00 00, 00 00 00 00, 00 00 00 00 ;................
00000170: 00 00 00 00, 00 00 00 00, 00 00 00 00, 00 00 00 00 ;................
00000180: 00 00 00 00, 00 00 00 00, 00 00 00 5f, 00 00 00 03 ;..........._....
00000190: 00 00 00 00, 00 00 00 00, 00 00 00 34, 00 00 00 7b ;...........4...{
000001a0: 00 00 00 00, 00 00 00 00, 00 00 00 04, 00 00 00 01 ;................
000001b0: 00 00 00 67, 00 00 00 02, 00 00 00 00, 00 00 00 00 ;...g............
000001c0: 00 00 00 b0, 00 00 00 60, 00 00 00 01, 00 00 00 02 ;...°...`........
000001d0: 00 00 00 04, 00 00 00 10, 00 00 00 04, 00 00 00 01 ;................
000001e0: 00 00 00 06, 00 00 00 00, 00 00 01 10, 00 00 00 40 ;...............@
000001f0: 00 00 00 00, 00 00 00 00, 00 00 00 04, 00 00 00 00 ;................
00000200: 00 00 00 6f, 00 00 00 09, 00 00 00 00, 00 00 00 00 ;...o............
00000210: 00 00 01 50, 00 00 00 10, 00 00 00 02, 00 00 00 03 ;...P............
00000220: 00 00 00 04, 00 00 00 0c ;........

--
Summary: arm-elf-objdump gives format not recognized with this
elf-formatted file
Product: binutils
Version: 2.20
Status: NEW
Severity: normal
Priority: P2
Component: binutils
AssignedTo: unassigned at sources dot redhat dot com
ReportedBy: ben dot baron at sun dot com
CC: bug-binutils at gnu dot org

http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=11003

------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.

_______________________________________________
bug-binutils mailing list
bug-binutils@...
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils

[Bug binutils/11002] ld string merge does not respect symbol size

2009-11-23T06:48:42Z

------- Additional Comments From schwab at linux-m68k dot org 2009-11-23 14:48 -------
> a = 'ab\0b\0'

This is not a valid zero-terminated string.

--
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|REOPENED |RESOLVED
Resolution| |INVALID

http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=11002

------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.

_______________________________________________
bug-binutils mailing list
bug-binutils@...
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils