http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=12762
--- Comment #30 from vanboxem.ruben at gmail dot com 2012-09-23 20:33:53 UTC ---
The original problem has shifted somewhat. Using GCC 4.7.2 and ld
2.23.51.20120920, the first link error I get now when compiling Qt (where I
originally met
http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=12762
vanboxem.ruben at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|lto produces multiple |LTO on Windows
http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=13084
--- Comment #7 from H.J. Lu 2012-09-23 15:22:24
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #6)
> Oh, I see. I just changed integer_constant function to disallow 64-bit
> constant
> in x32 mode and got fails on instructions like this:
> movq %rax,0x
http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=13084
--- Comment #6 from Michael Zolotukhin
2012-09-23 15:17:07 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #5)
> (In reply to comment #4)
> > If working with 64-bit values is incorrect in x32-mode, then we also need to
> > fix tests from gas/i386/ilp32/x
http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=13084
--- Comment #5 from H.J. Lu 2012-09-23 14:48:35
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #4)
> If working with 64-bit values is incorrect in x32-mode, then we also need to
> fix tests from gas/i386/ilp32/x86-64.s - as they are mostly copied from 64
http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=13084
--- Comment #4 from Michael Zolotukhin
2012-09-23 14:21:16 UTC ---
If working with 64-bit values is incorrect in x32-mode, then we also need to
fix tests from gas/i386/ilp32/x86-64.s - as they are mostly copied from 64-bit
tests, they c
http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=13084
--- Comment #3 from H.J. Lu 2012-09-23 14:08:46
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #2)
> What is expected output for x32 case?
> Should AS produce 64-bit symbols or should it emit an error (like it should do
> in 32-bit case)?
Assembler c
http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=13084
Michael Zolotukhin changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||michael.v.zolotukhin at
