[Bug gold/19002] .eh_frame error: "no .eh_frame_hdr table will be created" with gold

https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19002 Evgeniy Stepanov changed: What|Removed |Added CC||eugeni.stepanov at gmail dot com

[Bug ld/19827] Wrong relocation with defined symbol in PIE

https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19827 --- Comment #2 from H.J. Lu --- Fixed on master so far. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ bug-binutils mailing list bug-binutils@gnu.org

[Bug ld/19807] [2.26 regression] R_386_GOT32X optimization breaks linux kernel

https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19807 H.J. Lu changed: What|Removed |Added Status|WAITING |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug ld/19803] gc-sections breaks PE DLL variable export

https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19803 --- Comment #4 from martin.koegler at chello dot at --- Fixes all my testcases. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ bug-binutils mailing list

[Bug ld/19827] Wrong relocation with defined symbol in PIE

https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19827 --- Comment #1 from cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org --- The master branch has been updated by H.J. Lu : https://sourceware.org/git/gitweb.cgi?p=binutils-gdb.git;h=4e0c91e45402ebf4215066e4a61143896e831049 commit

[Bug ld/19803] gc-sections breaks PE DLL variable export

https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19803 --- Comment #3 from Nick Clifton --- Created attachment 9096 --> https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=9096=edit Proposed patch Hi Martin, Please could you try out this patch. It is a work in progress, but it might do the

[Bug ld/19807] [2.26 regression] R_386_GOT32X optimization breaks linux kernel

https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19807 --- Comment #18 from cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org --- The master branch has been updated by H.J. Lu : https://sourceware.org/git/gitweb.cgi?p=binutils-gdb.git;h=4c10bbaa0912742322f10d9d5bb630ba4e15dfa7 commit

[Bug ld/19827] Wrong relocation with defined symbol in PIE

https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19827 H.J. Lu changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|Wrong relocation with |Wrong relocation with

[Bug gold/19823] gold produces copy reloc of protected symbols

https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19823 --- Comment #5 from Rafael Ávila de Espíndola --- (In reply to H.J. Lu from comment #4) > (In reply to Cary Coutant from comment #1) > > > > Or, perhaps (I need to check...), gold might be incorrectly allowing > > the COPY relocation to a

[Bug gold/19823] gold produces copy reloc of protected symbols

https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19823 --- Comment #4 from H.J. Lu --- (In reply to Cary Coutant from comment #1) > > Or, perhaps (I need to check...), gold might be incorrectly allowing > the COPY relocation to a protected symbol, failing to consider that > the bindings within

[Bug ld/19807] [2.26 regression] R_386_GOT32X optimization breaks linux kernel

https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19807 H.J. Lu changed: What|Removed |Added Depends on||19827 --- Comment #17 from H.J. Lu ---

[Bug ld/19827] Wrong relocation with linker-defined symbol in PIE

https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19827 H.J. Lu changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||19807 Referenced Bugs:

[Bug ld/19827] New: Wrong relocation with linker-defined symbol in PIE

https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19827 Bug ID: 19827 Summary: Wrong relocation with linker-defined symbol in PIE Product: binutils Version: 2.26 Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: P2

[Bug gold/19823] gold produces copy reloc of protected symbols

https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19823 Rafael Ávila de Espíndola changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|gold doesn't consider copy |gold produces copy reloc

[Bug gold/19823] gold doesn't consider copy reloc of protected symbols

https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19823 H.J. Lu changed: What|Removed |Added CC||hjl.tools at gmail dot com

[Bug ld/19539] ld: Segmentation fault (core dumped)

https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19539 --- Comment #5 from H.J. Lu --- Also fixed on 2.26 branch. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ bug-binutils mailing list bug-binutils@gnu.org

[Bug ld/19539] ld: Segmentation fault (core dumped)

https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19539 --- Comment #4 from cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org --- The binutils-2_26-branch branch has been updated by H.J. Lu : https://sourceware.org/git/gitweb.cgi?p=binutils-gdb.git;h=17248591dadd061eb26d1b5f8ef048c1bb24b42e

Re: [Bug ld/19623] regression: erroneous relocation for symbols in absolute section (vma == 0)

> On 15 Mar 2016, at 11:55, Nick Clifton wrote: > >> Yes, the backport is fine with me. >> >> Can the OP commit it ? > > I think not, so I have taken the liberty and applied it myself. Thanks! ___ bug-binutils mailing list

[Bug ld/19623] regression: erroneous relocation for symbols in absolute section (vma == 0)

https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19623 --- Comment #15 from cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org --- The binutils-2_26-branch branch has been updated by Nick Clifton :

Re: [Bug ld/19623] regression: erroneous relocation for symbols in absolute section (vma == 0)

> Yes, the backport is fine with me. > > Can the OP commit it ? I think not, so I have taken the liberty and applied it myself. Cheers Nick ___ bug-binutils mailing list bug-binutils@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils

Re: [Bug ld/19623] regression: erroneous relocation for symbols in absolute section (vma == 0)

> On 14 Mar 2016, at 18:46, nickc at redhat dot com > wrote: > > https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19623 > > --- Comment #13 from Nick Clifton --- > Hi, > >> So downstream [1] is asking for an inclusion into the 2.26 branch. >> Considering

[Bug ld/19623] regression: erroneous relocation for symbols in absolute section (vma == 0)

https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19623 --- Comment #14 from gingold at adacore dot com --- > On 14 Mar 2016, at 18:46, nickc at redhat dot com > wrote: > > https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19623 > > --- Comment #13 from Nick

[Bug ld/19807] [2.26 regression] R_386_GOT32X optimization breaks linux kernel

https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19807 --- Comment #16 from Fabian Vogt --- (In reply to H.J. Lu from comment #15) > (In reply to Fabian Vogt from comment #14) > > I could reproduce the issue with > > > > GNU ld (GNU Binutils) 2.26.0.20160314 > > > > as well. For the