On 2/26/19 11:18 AM, Michael Matz wrote:
Hi,
On Tue, 26 Feb 2019, Richard Biener wrote:
get_build_id_1 (struct dl_phdr_info *info, size_t, void *data)
{
Isn't this all a bit silly? We could simply encode the svn revision, or
maybe even just some random bytes generated once in stage1 at buil
* Richard Biener:
>> Since the introduction of GNU Property notes this is (sadly) no longer
>> the correct way to iterate through ELF notes. The padding of names and
>> desc might now depend on the alignment of the PT_NOTE segment.
>> https://sourceware.org/ml/binutils/2018-09/msg00359.html
>
> I
On Tue, 2019-02-26 at 18:13 +0100, Richard Biener wrote:
> > > That would mean when p_align == 8 the note name isn't 8-aligned
> > > but just 4-aligned? That is, sizeof (Elf*_Nhdr) == 12, and the
> > > name starts right after that instead of being aligned according
> > > to p_align? That sounds o
On Tue, 26 Feb 2019, Mark Wielaard wrote:
> On Tue, 2019-02-26 at 15:36 +0100, Richard Biener wrote:
> > On Tue, 26 Feb 2019, Mark Wielaard wrote:
> >
> > > On Tue, 2019-02-26 at 09:33 +0100, Richard Biener wrote:
> > > > On Mon, 25 Feb 2019, Mark Wielaard wrote:
> > > > > Since the introduction
On Tue, 2019-02-26 at 15:36 +0100, Richard Biener wrote:
> On Tue, 26 Feb 2019, Mark Wielaard wrote:
>
> > On Tue, 2019-02-26 at 09:33 +0100, Richard Biener wrote:
> > > On Mon, 25 Feb 2019, Mark Wielaard wrote:
> > > > Since the introduction of GNU Property notes this is (sadly) no
> > > > longer
On Tue, 26 Feb 2019, Michael Matz wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Tue, 26 Feb 2019, Richard Biener wrote:
>
> > get_build_id_1 (struct dl_phdr_info *info, size_t, void *data)
> > {
>
> Isn't this all a bit silly? We could simply encode the svn revision, or
> maybe even just some random bytes generated o
Hi,
On Tue, 26 Feb 2019, Richard Biener wrote:
> get_build_id_1 (struct dl_phdr_info *info, size_t, void *data)
> {
Isn't this all a bit silly? We could simply encode the svn revision, or
maybe even just some random bytes generated once in stage1 at build time
as "checksum" and be done with.
On Tue, 26 Feb 2019, Richard Biener wrote:
> On Tue, 26 Feb 2019, Mark Wielaard wrote:
>
> > On Tue, 2019-02-26 at 09:33 +0100, Richard Biener wrote:
> > > On Mon, 25 Feb 2019, Mark Wielaard wrote:
> > > > Since the introduction of GNU Property notes this is (sadly) no
> > > > longer
> > > > the
On Tue, 26 Feb 2019, Mark Wielaard wrote:
> On Tue, 2019-02-26 at 09:33 +0100, Richard Biener wrote:
> > On Mon, 25 Feb 2019, Mark Wielaard wrote:
> > > Since the introduction of GNU Property notes this is (sadly) no
> > > longer
> > > the correct way to iterate through ELF notes. The padding of n
On Tue, 2019-02-26 at 09:33 +0100, Richard Biener wrote:
> On Mon, 25 Feb 2019, Mark Wielaard wrote:
> > Since the introduction of GNU Property notes this is (sadly) no
> > longer
> > the correct way to iterate through ELF notes. The padding of names
> > and
> > desc might now depend on the alignm
On Mon, 25 Feb 2019, Mark Wielaard wrote:
> On Fri, 2019-02-22 at 12:29 +0100, Richard Biener wrote:
> > +struct build_id_note {
> > +/* The NHdr. */
> > +uint32_t namesz;
> > +uint32_t descsz;
> > +uint32_t type;
> > +
> > +char name[4]; /* Note name for build-id is "GNU\0" *
On Fri, 2019-02-22 at 12:29 +0100, Richard Biener wrote:
> +struct build_id_note {
> +/* The NHdr. */
> +uint32_t namesz;
> +uint32_t descsz;
> +uint32_t type;
> +
> +char name[4]; /* Note name for build-id is "GNU\0" */
> +unsigned char build_id[16];
> +};
Note that build
On February 22, 2019 5:03:46 PM GMT+01:00, Jakub Jelinek
wrote:
>On Fri, Feb 22, 2019 at 08:47:09AM -0700, Jeff Law wrote:
>> > 2019-02-22 Richard Biener
>> >
>> >c/
>> >* Make-lang.in (cc1-checksum.c): Checksum only gtype-desc.o.
>> >
>> >cp/
>> >* Make-lang.in (cc1plus-chec
On Fri, Feb 22, 2019 at 08:47:09AM -0700, Jeff Law wrote:
> > 2019-02-22 Richard Biener
> >
> > c/
> > * Make-lang.in (cc1-checksum.c): Checksum only gtype-desc.o.
> >
> > cp/
> > * Make-lang.in (cc1plus-checksum.c): Checksum only gtype-desc.o.
> >
> > objc/
> > * Make
On 2/22/19 4:29 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
>
> GCC builds are currently not reproducible because for one the checksum
> we compute for PCH purposes (by genchecksum) nowaways includes checksums
> of archives (since we switched from checksumming a dummy executable
> to checksumming object files). Th
GCC builds are currently not reproducible because for one the checksum
we compute for PCH purposes (by genchecksum) nowaways includes checksums
of archives (since we switched from checksumming a dummy executable
to checksumming object files). That includes dates (unless built with
-D which we do
16 matches
Mail list logo
