[Bug libctf/25155] libctf directory doesn't compile with MinGW
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25155 --- Comment #4 from cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org --- The gdb-9-branch branch has been updated by Joel Brobecker : https://sourceware.org/git/gitweb.cgi?p=binutils-gdb.git;h=84baa6a51500a6e6faf422ab12f61c5c9857cfd0 commit 84baa6a51500a6e6faf422ab12f61c5c9857cfd0 Author: Eli Zaretskii Date: Sun Jan 5 09:50:27 2020 +0400 libctf: Add configure check for asprintf (for MinGW) This commit fixes a compilation warning when compiling libctf on MinGW: libctf/ctf-dump.c:118:8: warning: implicit declaration of function 'asprintf'; did you mean 'vasprintf'? [-Wimplicit-function-declaration] if (asprintf (&bit, " %lx: [slice 0x%x:0x%x]", ^~~~ vasprintf MinGW doesn't provide that function, so we depend on the one provided by libiberty. However, the declaration is guarded by HAVE_DECL_ASPRINTF, which we do not have in libctf's config.h. libctf/ChangeLog: PR binutils/25155: * configure.ac: Add AC_CHECK_DECLS([asprintf]). * configure, config.h.in: Regenerate. (cherry picked from commit 3a657c600bde2d3bd84870f75968622bbdb69ce8) -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.
[Bug libctf/25155] libctf directory doesn't compile with MinGW
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25155 --- Comment #3 from cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org --- The master branch has been updated by Joel Brobecker : https://sourceware.org/git/gitweb.cgi?p=binutils-gdb.git;h=3a657c600bde2d3bd84870f75968622bbdb69ce8 commit 3a657c600bde2d3bd84870f75968622bbdb69ce8 Author: Eli Zaretskii Date: Sun Jan 5 09:50:27 2020 +0400 libctf: Add configure check for asprintf (for MinGW) This commit fixes a compilation warning when compiling libctf on MinGW: libctf/ctf-dump.c:118:8: warning: implicit declaration of function 'asprintf'; did you mean 'vasprintf'? [-Wimplicit-function-declaration] if (asprintf (&bit, " %lx: [slice 0x%x:0x%x]", ^~~~ vasprintf MinGW doesn't provide that function, so we depend on the one provided by libiberty. However, the declaration is guarded by HAVE_DECL_ASPRINTF, which we do not have in libctf's config.h. libctf/ChangeLog: PR binutils/25155: * configure.ac: Add AC_CHECK_DECLS([asprintf]). * configure, config.h.in: Regenerate. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.
[Bug ld/25327] FAIL: Run pr20276
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25327 --- Comment #3 from dave.anglin at bell dot net --- On 2020-01-04 3:56 p.m., dave.anglin at bell dot net wrote: > https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25327 > > --- Comment #2 from dave.anglin at bell dot net --- > On 2020-01-03 6:33 a.m., nickc at redhat dot com wrote: >> Please could you try out the attached patch and let me know if it works ? > Hi Nick, > > The patch resolves the fail. There's something wierd going on. I did a full build and check with patches for ld/25326 and ld/25327 and the following teats failed: FAIL: Run with libfunc1.so comm1.o FAIL: Run pr20267a FAIL: Run pr20267b I then reran the testsuite and these tests didn't fail. In my first check, I just reran testsuite with patches. Dave -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.
[Bug ld/25327] FAIL: Run pr20276
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25327 --- Comment #2 from dave.anglin at bell dot net --- On 2020-01-03 6:33 a.m., nickc at redhat dot com wrote: > Please could you try out the attached patch and let me know if it works ? Hi Nick, The patch resolves the fail. Happy New Year, Dave -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.
[Bug ld/25326] FAIL: Run pr19579
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25326 --- Comment #2 from dave.anglin at bell dot net --- On 2020-01-03 6:41 a.m., nickc at redhat dot com wrote: > Please can you try out the attached patch and let me know if it solves the > problem ? Yes, it resolves the failure. Happy New Year, Dave -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.
[Bug ld/25315] `__tcf_0' referenced in section `.rodata._ZNK6common26ChainResidueAtomDescriptor3strB5cxx11Ev.cst4' of mode_query_balls_distances.o: defined in discarded section `.text.__tcf_0[_ZNK6com
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25315 --- Comment #17 from John David Anglin --- Links: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=279824&root=gcc&view=rev https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=279823&root=gcc&view=rev -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.
[Bug ld/25316] ia64 ld fails to convert binary into elf: "failed to merge target specific data"
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25316 --- Comment #4 from Sergei Trofimovich --- Was pushed as https://sourceware.org/git/gitweb.cgi?p=binutils-gdb.git;a=commitdiff;h=b26a3d5827edcb942b3af5b921bf317bbc0c8e83 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.
[Bug binutils/25344] z80 disassembler recursion
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25344 --- Comment #1 from Sergey Belyashov --- You are right. 0x40, 0x49, 0x52 and 0x5b are ez80 opcode prefixes which changes memory model of next instruction. 0x40 + 0x40 is impossible opcode. I will fix it soon (within a week). You may try fix it. Move lines placed at end of suffix() (opcodes/z80.c): buf_in->n_used += buf.n_used; buf_in->n_fetch += buf.n_fetch; before: if (*p == '.') /* suffix already present */ It should fix error. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.
[Bug binutils/25344] z80 disassembler recursion
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25344 Alan Modra changed: What|Removed |Added Target||z80-coff CC||sergey.belyashov at gmail dot com -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.
[Bug binutils/25344] New: z80 disassembler recursion
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25344 Bug ID: 25344 Summary: z80 disassembler recursion Product: binutils Version: 2.34 (HEAD) Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: P2 Component: binutils Assignee: unassigned at sourceware dot org Reporter: amodra at gmail dot com Target Milestone: --- cat > z80.s <: ==23670== Conditional jump or move depends on uninitialised value(s) ==23670==at 0x160C0D: suffix (z80-dis.c:749) ==23670==by 0x160B39: print_insn_z80_buf (z80-dis.c:861) ==23670==by 0x160BF8: suffix (z80-dis.c:745) ==23670==by 0x160B39: print_insn_z80_buf (z80-dis.c:861) ==23670==by 0x160BF8: suffix (z80-dis.c:745) ==23670==by 0x160B39: print_insn_z80_buf (z80-dis.c:861) ==23670==by 0x160BF8: suffix (z80-dis.c:745) ==23670==by 0x160B39: print_insn_z80_buf (z80-dis.c:861) ==23670==by 0x160BF8: suffix (z80-dis.c:745) ==23670==by 0x160B39: print_insn_z80_buf (z80-dis.c:861) ==23670==by 0x160BF8: suffix (z80-dis.c:745) ==23670==by 0x160B39: print_insn_z80_buf (z80-dis.c:861) Also, recursion is only bounded by the number of 0x40 (or 0x49, 0x52, 0x5b) bytes. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.
