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

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

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

https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32211 Nick Clifton changed: What|Removed |Added Status|WAITING |RESOLVED Resolution|---

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

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

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.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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.

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

https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32211 H.J. Lu changed: What|Removed |Added CC||hjl.tools at gmail dot com Stat

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

https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32211 Dan McDonald changed: What|Removed |Added CC||danmcd at mnx dot io -- You are recei

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

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