https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65559
--- Comment #22 from Kai Tietz <ktietz at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
I will be able to test this tomorrow (or this evening) for a linux bootstrap.
Patch tested is:
Index: lto-wrapper.c
===================================================================
--- lto-wrapper.c (Revision 222269)
+++ lto-wrapper.c (Arbeitskopie)
@@ -934,7 +934,7 @@ run_gcc (unsigned argc, char *argv[])
filename[p - argv[i]] = '\0';
file_offset = (off_t) loffset;
}
- fd = open (argv[i], O_RDONLY);
+ fd = open (filename, O_RDONLY | O_BINARY);
if (fd == -1)
{
lto_argv[lto_argc++] = argv[i];
Honza, Jakub, when regression-test passes is it ok to apply?
The O_BINARY change is pretty obvious, but the filename vs argv[i] change
should indeed affect other targets using the @<n> decoration, too.
