https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31761
Alan Modra changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |NOTABUG
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31796
--- Comment #6 from Sourceware Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Alan Modra :
https://sourceware.org/git/gitweb.cgi?p=binutils-gdb.git;h=7574c0c2b386efa4bd0b1735237403177e4a964e
commit 7574c0c2b386efa4bd0b1735237403177e4a964e
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31800
--- Comment #3 from Rostislav Krasny ---
In case you can't guarantee the "core.sharedRepository" configuration property
was set properly before the src-release.sh was ran you can, in addition to
setting umask in its beginning, also set the "co
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31800
--- Comment #2 from Rostislav Krasny ---
Hi Nick,
The "core.sharedRepository" configuration property of Git allows to override
user’s umask value for all tracked files and their directories in the Git
repository, i.e. how they are created in
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31795
--- Comment #65 from Fangrui Song ---
> > Changing ET_DYN to ET_EXEC fulfills the address requirement but disables
> > ASLR.
> > Is it intentional?
>
> That's my understanding of reading the -Ttext-segment documentation. The
> question is w
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31795
--- Comment #64 from mintsuki ---
(In reply to Adhemerval Zanella from comment #63)
> (In reply to mintsuki from comment #61)
> >
> > Actually I don't think that may be possible, at least not by checking the
> > OS/ABI field alone, given on m
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31795
--- Comment #63 from Adhemerval Zanella
---
(In reply to mintsuki from comment #61)
>
> Actually I don't think that may be possible, at least not by checking the
> OS/ABI field alone, given on my Linux host it seems to be a generic UNIX -
>
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31761
Sam James changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||sam at gentoo dot org
--
You are receivi
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31800
Nick Clifton changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||nickc at redhat dot com
Ever confi
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31795
--- Comment #62 from mintsuki ---
(In reply to Adhemerval Zanella from comment #60)
> (In reply to mintsuki from comment #59)
> > (In reply to Adhemerval Zanella from comment #58)
> > > (In reply to mintsuki from comment #41)
>
> > > So maybe
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31795
--- Comment #61 from mintsuki ---
(In reply to mintsuki from comment #59)
> (In reply to Adhemerval Zanella from comment #58)
> > (In reply to mintsuki from comment #41)
> > > (In reply to Adhemerval Zanella from comment #39)
> > > > (In reply
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31795
--- Comment #60 from Adhemerval Zanella
---
(In reply to mintsuki from comment #59)
> (In reply to Adhemerval Zanella from comment #58)
> > (In reply to mintsuki from comment #41)
> > So maybe we either enable this iff targeting Linux, or ch
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31795
--- Comment #59 from mintsuki ---
(In reply to Adhemerval Zanella from comment #58)
> (In reply to mintsuki from comment #41)
> > (In reply to Adhemerval Zanella from comment #39)
> > > (In reply to Fangrui Song from comment #37)
> > > > I agr
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31761
--- Comment #5 from Peter Damianov ---
Just to be completely clear, the command is incorrect, but the way ld reacts to
the mistake is the problem. In this case, the "file.c" will be deleted, the
user has potentially lost a file, and day ruined
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31795
--- Comment #58 from Adhemerval Zanella
---
(In reply to mintsuki from comment #41)
> (In reply to Adhemerval Zanella from comment #39)
> > (In reply to Fangrui Song from comment #37)
> > > I agree with mintsuki . The "-pie -Ttext-segment=non
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31795
--- Comment #57 from mintsuki ---
(In reply to H.J. Lu from comment #55)
> (In reply to mintsuki from comment #54)
> > (In reply to H.J. Lu from comment #52)
> > > (In reply to H.J. Lu from comment #51)
> > > > (In reply to mintsuki from comme
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31795
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|hjl.tools at gmail dot com |
--
You are receiving this mail bec
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31795
--- Comment #56 from mintsuki ---
(In reply to mintsuki from comment #54)
> (In reply to H.J. Lu from comment #52)
> > (In reply to H.J. Lu from comment #51)
> > > (In reply to mintsuki from comment #50)
> > >
> > > > > Why can't you check DF
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31795
--- Comment #55 from H.J. Lu ---
(In reply to mintsuki from comment #54)
> (In reply to H.J. Lu from comment #52)
> > (In reply to H.J. Lu from comment #51)
> > > (In reply to mintsuki from comment #50)
> > >
> > > > > Why can't you check DF_
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31795
--- Comment #54 from mintsuki ---
(In reply to H.J. Lu from comment #52)
> (In reply to H.J. Lu from comment #51)
> > (In reply to mintsuki from comment #50)
> >
> > > > Why can't you check DF_1_PIE for PIE?
> > >
> > > That is what I do now
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31761
Nick Clifton changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||nickc at redhat dot com
--- Comment #3
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31795
--- Comment #53 from mintsuki ---
(In reply to H.J. Lu from comment #51)
> (In reply to mintsuki from comment #50)
>
> > > Why can't you check DF_1_PIE for PIE?
> >
> > That is what I do now, but to check for *relocatability*. PIE in and of
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31795
--- Comment #52 from H.J. Lu ---
(In reply to H.J. Lu from comment #51)
> (In reply to mintsuki from comment #50)
>
> > > Why can't you check DF_1_PIE for PIE?
> >
> > That is what I do now, but to check for *relocatability*. PIE in and of
>
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31795
--- Comment #51 from H.J. Lu ---
(In reply to mintsuki from comment #50)
> > Why can't you check DF_1_PIE for PIE?
>
> That is what I do now, but to check for *relocatability*. PIE in and of
> itself is not something that tells me whether I
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31795
--- Comment #50 from mintsuki ---
(In reply to H.J. Lu from comment #49)
> (In reply to mintsuki from comment #48)
> > (In reply to H.J. Lu from comment #47)
> > > (In reply to mintsuki from comment #46)
> > > g.
> > > > >
> > > > > Opt-in to
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31795
--- Comment #49 from H.J. Lu ---
(In reply to mintsuki from comment #48)
> (In reply to H.J. Lu from comment #47)
> > (In reply to mintsuki from comment #46)
> > g.
> > > >
> > > > Opt-in to ET_EXEC will be wrong.
> > >
> > > Why will it be
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31795
--- Comment #48 from mintsuki ---
(In reply to H.J. Lu from comment #47)
> (In reply to mintsuki from comment #46)
> g.
> > >
> > > Opt-in to ET_EXEC will be wrong.
> >
> > Why will it be wrong? What if someone (me) wants to make a PIE that
Hi Jiří,
I've just spotted a typo in GNU Assembler documentation:
File path: gas/doc/as.texi
939 Ignored. Supported for compatibility with tools that apss the same
option to
Doh! Thanks for reporting this. I have checked in the obvious fix...
Thanks for a great software package (espe
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31795
--- Comment #47 from H.J. Lu ---
(In reply to mintsuki from comment #46)
g.
> >
> > Opt-in to ET_EXEC will be wrong.
>
> Why will it be wrong? What if someone (me) wants to make a PIE that loads at
It is wrong because -Ttext-segment=0x6
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31796
Nick Clifton changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31796
--- Comment #4 from Sourceware Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Nick Clifton :
https://sourceware.org/git/gitweb.cgi?p=binutils-gdb.git;h=73c8603c3f2f8d47f3b225df3ba117ea0b3f51b3
commit 73c8603c3f2f8d47f3b225df3ba117ea0b3f51
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31796
--- Comment #3 from Nick Clifton ---
Snafu - the AArch64 architecture was not being assigned a SEH type. Fixing...
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31796
Nick Clifton changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||nickc at redhat dot com
St
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31795
--- Comment #46 from mintsuki ---
(In reply to H.J. Lu from comment #45)
> (In reply to mintsuki from comment #44)
> > (In reply to H.J. Lu from comment #43)
> > > (In reply to mintsuki from comment #42)
> > > > (In reply to H.J. Lu from comme
Hi Alexander,
I use sstrip from ELFkickers instead strip from binutils for more smallest
executables
https://github.com/BR903/ELFkickers
May be make strip more efficient by use ELFkickers sources ?
Thanks for the offer, but I think that we will pass.
There are various issues, such as licensi
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31795
--- Comment #44 from mintsuki ---
(In reply to H.J. Lu from comment #43)
> (In reply to mintsuki from comment #42)
> > (In reply to H.J. Lu from comment #40)
> > > -Ttext-segment=0x6000 should create a binary which is guaranteed
> > >
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31795
--- Comment #43 from H.J. Lu ---
(In reply to mintsuki from comment #42)
> (In reply to H.J. Lu from comment #40)
> > -Ttext-segment=0x6000 should create a binary which is guaranteed to
> > be
> > loaded at 0x6000.
>
> ...as l
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31795
--- Comment #45 from H.J. Lu ---
(In reply to mintsuki from comment #44)
> (In reply to H.J. Lu from comment #43)
> > (In reply to mintsuki from comment #42)
> > > (In reply to H.J. Lu from comment #40)
> > > > -Ttext-segment=0x6000 sh
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31795
--- Comment #42 from mintsuki ---
(In reply to H.J. Lu from comment #40)
> -Ttext-segment=0x6000 should create a binary which is guaranteed to
> be
> loaded at 0x6000.
...as long as it's not a PIE.
--
You are receiving this
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31795
--- Comment #41 from mintsuki ---
(In reply to Adhemerval Zanella from comment #39)
> (In reply to Fangrui Song from comment #37)
> > I agree with mintsuki . The "-pie -Ttext-segment=non-zero => ET_EXEC" hack
> > should not be needed.
> >
> >
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31795
--- Comment #40 from H.J. Lu ---
-Ttext-segment=0x6000 should create a binary which is guaranteed to be
loaded at 0x6000.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31795
Adhemerval Zanella changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||adhemerval.zanella at linaro
dot
42 matches
Mail list logo
