[Bug gprofng/32207] [collect app] Error in parsing the -O option

2024-09-26 Thread vladimir.mezentsev at oracle dot com
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32207 Vladimir Mezentsev changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|NEW

[Bug ld/32219] New: ELF orphan placement doesn't work well without .interp

2024-09-26 Thread hjl.tools at gmail dot com
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

[Bug gprofng/32207] [collect app] Error in parsing the -O option

2024-09-26 Thread cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org
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

[Bug binutils/32211] 2.41 and later don't seem to honor the `-z` flag

2024-09-26 Thread nickc at redhat dot com
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

[Bug binutils/32211] 2.41 and later don't seem to honor the `-z` flag

2024-09-26 Thread danmcd at mnx dot io
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.

Re: as aborts after buffer overflow

2024-09-26 Thread Peter Kozich (GM)
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

[Bug binutils/32211] 2.41 and later don't seem to honor the `-z` flag

2024-09-26 Thread danmcd at mnx dot io
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

Re: as aborts after buffer overflow

2024-09-26 Thread Nick Clifton
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

as aborts after buffer overflow

2024-09-26 Thread Peter Kozich (GM)
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

[Bug binutils/32211] 2.41 and later don't seem to honor the `-z` flag

2024-09-26 Thread nickc at redhat dot com
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

[Bug binutils/32211] 2.41 and later don't seem to honor the `-z` flag

2024-09-26 Thread danmcd at mnx dot io
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

[Bug binutils/32211] 2.41 and later don't seem to honor the `-z` flag

2024-09-26 Thread danmcd at mnx dot io
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

[Bug binutils/32211] 2.41 and later don't seem to honor the `-z` flag

2024-09-26 Thread danmcd at mnx dot io
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

[Bug binutils/32211] 2.41 and later don't seem to honor the `-z` flag

2024-09-26 Thread danmcd at mnx dot io
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

[Bug binutils/32211] 2.41 and later don't seem to honor the `-z` flag

2024-09-26 Thread nickc at redhat dot com
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32211 Nick Clifton changed: What|Removed |Added CC||nickc at redhat dot com --- Comment #7

[Bug binutils/32211] 2.41 and later don't seem to honor the `-z` flag

2024-09-26 Thread danmcd at mnx dot io
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

[Bug binutils/32211] 2.41 and later don't seem to honor the `-z` flag

2024-09-26 Thread hjl.tools at gmail dot com
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

[Bug binutils/32211] 2.41 and later don't seem to honor the `-z` flag

2024-09-26 Thread hjl.tools at gmail dot com
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

[Bug ld/32191] --rosegment places .note.gnu.property in executable PT_LOAD segment for -z separate-code

2024-09-26 Thread cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org
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