[Bug binutils/17486] New: Build failure due to -Werror=unused-value
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17486 Bug ID: 17486 Summary: Build failure due to -Werror=unused-value Product: binutils Version: 2.24 Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: P2 Component: binutils Assignee: unassigned at sourceware dot org Reporter: josh at joshtriplett dot org Attempting to build Linux binutils 2.24.51.0.3 produced the following errors: gcc -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -I. -I. -I../bfd -I./config -I./../include -I./.. -I./../bfd -DLOCALEDIR="\"/home/josh/src/binutils-linux/inst/share/locale \"" -W -Wall -Wstrict-prototypes -Wmissing-prototypes -Wshadow -Werror -g -O2 - MT subsegs.o -MD -MP -MF .deps/subsegs.Tpo -c -o subsegs.o subsegs.c subsegs.c: In function ‘subseg_change’: subsegs.c:70:37: error: right-hand operand of comma expression has no effect [-Werror=unused-value] bfd_set_section_userdata (stdoutput, seg, seginfo); ^ subsegs.c: In function ‘subseg_get’: subsegs.c:172:40: error: right-hand operand of comma expression has no effe ct [-Werror=unused-value] bfd_set_section_userdata (stdoutput, secptr, seginfo); ^ [...] gcc -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -I. -I. -I../bfd -I./config -I./../include -I./.. -I./../bfd -DLOCALEDIR="\"/home/josh/src/binutils-linux/inst/share/locale \"" -W -Wall -Wstrict-prototypes -Wmissing-prototypes -Wshadow -Werror -g -O2 - MT write.o -MD -MP -MF .deps/write.Tpo -c -o write.o write.c write.c: In function ‘record_alignment’: write.c:366:40: error: right-hand operand of comma expression has no effect [-Werror=unused-value] bfd_set_section_alignment (stdoutput, seg, align); ^ ~$ gcc --version gcc (Debian 4.9.1-16) 4.9.1 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ bug-binutils mailing list bug-binutils@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
[Bug binutils/17481] addr2line fails on some targets
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17481 Alan Modra changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||amodra at gmail dot com Assignee|unassigned at sourceware dot org |amodra at gmail dot com -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ bug-binutils mailing list bug-binutils@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
[Bug ld/17482] -melf32_x86_64 IE->LE transition error
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17482 --- Comment #2 from H.J. Lu --- Created attachment 7832 --> https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=7832&action=edit A patch This is the patch I am testing. But I may not have time to check it in for the next couple weeks. Please feel free to commit it for me if it is OK. Thanks. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ bug-binutils mailing list bug-binutils@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
[Bug ld/17482] -melf32_x86_64 IE->LE transition error
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17482 --- Comment #1 from H.J. Lu --- I couldn't find a good solution for this. I am leaning toward to encode instructions with gottpoff relocation with a dummy REX prefix (0x40) if there is no REX prefix. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ bug-binutils mailing list bug-binutils@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
[Bug ld/17447] .eh_frame_hdr table[5707] FDE at 0000000000c45b8c overlaps table[5708] FDE at 0000000000c45a88
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17447 --- Comment #9 from glaubitz at physik dot fu-berlin.de --- (In reply to Alan Modra from comment #8) > Adrian, from the error message you report your binutils did not contain the > fix for this PR, and there has been a further fix committed for pr17467. > Please upgrade to latest trunk binutils. Ah, I see. That explains why I can reproduce the problem only on some packages. Since Matthias Klose reported the issue, he is fully aware of it and therefore I will just wait until he updates binutils in Debian before I make another build attempt. Thanks for the heads-up! Adrian -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ bug-binutils mailing list bug-binutils@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
[Bug ld/17479] Shared object missing symbol explicitly specified in --retain-symbols-file
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17479 Alan Modra changed: What|Removed |Added CC||amodra at gmail dot com --- Comment #2 from Alan Modra --- If you omit -Wl,--retain-symbols-file=sym.list does the shared library contain the symbols you seem to have misplaced? I suspect the reason they are missing is simply that their object file is not included in the link. An object within an archive library won't be extracted unless it satisfies some undefined symbol at the point the archive is searched. See also the --whole-archive option. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ bug-binutils mailing list bug-binutils@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
[Bug binutils/17483] ar is limited to open only 256 files on i386-solaris2.11
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17483 --- Comment #2 from Karel Gardas --- Honestly, it probably is stdio limitation on max openned fds in the same time. I've reported here since I've seen 2.23.2 working well so I consider this to be a kind of regression in binutils since older one supports this crappy Solaris behaviour... If you don't agree, just close this and be done. I'll see if I may compile RTEMS toolchain for 64bits to work around this issue. Thanks! Karel -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ bug-binutils mailing list bug-binutils@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
[Bug binutils/17483] ar is limited to open only 256 files on i386-solaris2.11
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17483 --- Comment #1 from Andreas Schwab --- Please make sure this limit isn't imposed by stdio on your system. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ bug-binutils mailing list bug-binutils@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
[Bug binutils/17483] New: ar is limited to open only 256 files on i386-solaris2.11
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17483
Bug ID: 17483
Summary: ar is limited to open only 256 files on
i386-solaris2.11
Product: binutils
Version: 2.24
Status: NEW
Severity: normal
Priority: P2
Component: binutils
Assignee: unassigned at sourceware dot org
Reporter: karel.gardas at centrum dot cz
Hello,
I've compiled binutils 2.24 on Solaris 11 (using --disable-werror) on i386
platform and later while using compiled ar I've found out that it refuses to
archive more than 256 files into the archive. The failure looks like:
i386-rtems4.11-ar: lib_a-memset.o: Too many open files
I've verified that ulimit -a tells me that the limit for open files is high
enough:
$ ulimit -a
core file size (blocks, -c) unlimited
data seg size (kbytes, -d) unlimited
file size (blocks, -f) unlimited
open files (-n) 65456
pipe size(512 bytes, -p) 10
stack size (kbytes, -s) 8192
cpu time (seconds, -t) unlimited
max user processes (-u) 29995
virtual memory (kbytes, -v) unlimited
still the issue happen. I've used truss to see what's going on and it ends
with:
open64("lib_a-memmove.o", O_RDONLY)= 253
fcntl(253, F_GETFD, 0x)= 0
fcntl(253, F_SETFD, 0x0001)= 0
brk(0x08315A28)= 0x
brk(0x08317A28)= 0x
open64("lib_a-mempcpy.o", O_RDONLY)= 254
fcntl(254, F_GETFD, 0x)= 0
fcntl(254, F_SETFD, 0x0001)= 0
brk(0x08317A28)= 0x
brk(0x08319A28)= 0x
open64("lib_a-memrchr.o", O_RDONLY)= 255
fcntl(255, F_GETFD, 0x)= 0
fcntl(255, F_SETFD, 0x0001)= 0
brk(0x08319A28)= 0x
brk(0x0831BA28)= 0x
open64("lib_a-memset.o", O_RDONLY)= 256
close(256)= 0
open("/usr/lib/locale/en_US.UTF-8/LC_MESSAGES/SUNW_OST_OSLIB.mo", O_RDONLY)
Err#2 ENOENT
fstat64(2, 0xFEFFA6F0)= 0
i386-rtems4.11-arwrite(2, " i 3 8 6 - r t e m s 4 .".., 17)= 17
: write(2, " : ", 2)= 2
lib_a-memset.owrite(2, " l i b _ a - m e m s e t".., 14)= 14
: write(2, " : ", 2)= 2
Too many open fileswrite(2, " T o o m a n y o p e".., 19)= 19
write(2, "\n", 1)= 1
lstat64("../libc.a", 0xFEFFB5E0)= 0
unlink("../libc.a")= 0
llseek(3, 0, SEEK_CUR)= 8
_exit(1)
so it looks like there is 256 fd limit somewhere exposed in ar. I've also been
able to duplicate this issue with 2.23.90, but not with 2.23.2 which is running
fine for me.
Thanks!
Karel
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
bug-binutils mailing list
bug-binutils@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
