[Bug ld/30756] ld: -Wl,-z,pack-relative-relocs goes OOM on i586 link

2023-08-16 Thread amajer at suse dot de
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30756 --- Comment #6 from Adam Majer --- (In reply to Sam James from comment #5) > comment 3 makes it sound like -Wl,--no-keep-memory actually breaks it. We > had some problems in the past with this combination, like PR29939.. This is exactly true.

[Bug ld/30756] ld: -Wl, -z, pack-relative-relocs -Wl, --no-keep-memory goes OOM on i586 link

2023-08-16 Thread amajer at suse dot de
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30756 Adam Majer changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|ld: |ld: |-Wl,-z,pack-relat

[Bug ld/28231] relocation truncated to fit: R_X86_64_32S against `.text'

2023-08-16 Thread jbeulich at suse dot com
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28231 Jan Beulich changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jbeulich at suse dot com --- Comment #2

[Bug binutils/30703] bfd doc doesn't build anymore with makeinfo 4.12

2023-08-16 Thread nickc at redhat dot com
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30703 --- Comment #3 from Nick Clifton --- Hi Jan, Right, after downloading, building, installing and running lots of different versions of texinfo, I can confirm that support for the node style used by commit 8bb23cdbb498 was added with rele

[Bug binutils/30758] ODR violations in opcodes dir

2023-08-16 Thread nickc at redhat dot com
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30758 Nick Clifton changed: What|Removed |Added CC||nickc at redhat dot com --- Comment #1

[Bug binutils/30758] ODR violations in opcodes dir

2023-08-16 Thread vries at gcc dot gnu.org
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30758 --- Comment #2 from Tom de Vries --- (In reply to Nick Clifton from comment #1) > Hi Tom, > > How are you configuring and building the sources when you encounter > this error ? > Like so: ... $ cat build.sh #!/bin/sh pwd=$(pwd -P) sr

[Bug binutils/30758] ODR violations in opcodes dir

2023-08-16 Thread vries at gcc dot gnu.org
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30758 --- Comment #4 from Tom de Vries --- Created attachment 15070 --> https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=15070&action=edit MAKELOG.gz -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

[Bug ld/30768] X86: copy relocation against non-copyable protected symbol

2023-08-16 Thread hjl.tools at gmail dot com
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30768 H.J. Lu changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING CC|

[Bug ld/30722] ld tests 'Build property 3', 'Build property 4', 'Build property 5' fail (glibc-2.38?)

2023-08-16 Thread nickc at redhat dot com
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30722 --- Comment #8 from Nick Clifton --- (In reply to Sam James from comment #6) Hi Sam, > Created attachment 15066 [details] > 0001-ld-ld-lib.exp-log-failed-dump.out-contents-for-debug.patch That patch is approved - please apply. > 2) Figurin

[Bug binutils/30758] ODR violations in opcodes dir

2023-08-16 Thread vries at gcc dot gnu.org
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30758 --- Comment #3 from Tom de Vries --- Created attachment 15069 --> https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=15069&action=edit CONFIGURELOG.gz -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

[Bug binutils/30758] ODR violations in opcodes dir

2023-08-16 Thread amodra at gmail dot com
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30758 --- Comment #5 from Alan Modra --- I'm guessing that it is the use of opcodes cgen headers in gdb itself that is triggering these warnings, not the use of those headers in opcodes. I think I'd be looking at gdb/mep-tdep.c and gdb/or1k-tdep.c,

[Bug ld/30768] X86: copy relocation against non-copyable protected symbol

2023-08-16 Thread xiezhiheng at huawei dot com
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30768 --- Comment #2 from xiezhiheng --- (In reply to H.J. Lu from comment #1) > I have > > have-protected-data = no > > in config.make. What do you have? In my config.make, have-protected-data = yes Oh I think I find something interesting. Tha

[Bug ld/30722] ld tests 'Build property 3', 'Build property 4', 'Build property 5' fail (glibc-2.38?)

2023-08-16 Thread sam at gentoo dot org
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30722 Sam James changed: What|Removed |Added CC||hjl.tools at gmail dot com --- Comment #9

[Bug ld/30722] ld tests 'Build property 3', 'Build property 4', 'Build property 5' fail (glibc-2.38?)

2023-08-16 Thread sam at gentoo dot org
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30722 Sam James changed: What|Removed |Added See Also||https://sourceware.org/bugz

[Bug ld/30722] ld tests 'Build property 3', 'Build property 4', 'Build property 5' fail (glibc-2.38?)

2023-08-16 Thread sam at gentoo dot org
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30722 Sam James changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |2.42 -- You are receiving this mail beca

[Bug ld/30722] ld tests 'Build property 3', 'Build property 4', 'Build property 5' fail (glibc-2.38?)

2023-08-16 Thread sam at gentoo dot org
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30722 --- Comment #11 from Sam James --- commit 646657284f6b62a71a6869826e951b3def4d73a6 (upstream/master) Author: Sam James Date: Wed Aug 16 07:21:53 2023 +0100 ld: ld-lib.exp: log failed dump.out contents for debugging If we're using

[Bug ld/24458] Linker BFD 2.32 regression: __ehdr_start not useable in shared libraries: "relocation R_X86_64_PC32 against undefined symbol `__ehdr_start' can not be used when making a shared object;

2023-08-16 Thread sam at gentoo dot org
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24458 Sam James changed: What|Removed |Added See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill

[Bug binutils/30703] bfd doc doesn't build anymore with makeinfo 4.12

2023-08-16 Thread jbeulich at suse dot com
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30703 --- Comment #4 from Jan Beulich --- (In reply to Nick Clifton from comment #3) > So the next question is - are you asking that commit 8bb23cdbb498 be > reverted, so that the docs will build with older versions of texinfo, > or that the t