https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32211
--- Comment #17 from Dan McDonald ---
(In reply to Nick Clifton from comment #16)
> Hi Dan,
>
> (In reply to Dan McDonald from comment #15)
> > 1.) Thank you for confirming there was a doc update and I should've RTFM
> > more carefully. Ther
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.
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
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
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
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
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
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
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32211
--- Comment #3 from Dan McDonald ---
Run it on the provided sample files.
Also, is it possible that the combination of "-z -D" might be the problem?
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32211
Dan McDonald changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||danmcd at mnx dot io
--
You are
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32211
Dan McDonald changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|2.41 and later doesn't seem |2.41 and later don't seem
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32211
--- Comment #1 from Dan McDonald ---
This just in from 2.42 on Ubuntu, thanks to Szymon Sokół for the test results:
> I'd love to know if you get FAIL or Pass with 2.42 on Ubuntu.
These are the results:
2024-09-25 21:54:23 testcase@omega:/h
y: P2
Component: binutils
Assignee: unassigned at sourceware dot org
Reporter: danmcd at mnx dot io
Target Milestone: ---
Created attachment 15717
--> https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=15717&action=edit
Test data and script to confirm/deny that -z wo
13 matches
Mail list logo
