[cjwatson@debian.org: Bug-Squashing Party #7 report]
Daniel Jacobowitz
dan@debian.org
Fri Feb 22 21:54:00 GMT 2002
More information about the Binutils mailing list
Fri Feb 22 21:54:00 GMT 2002
- Previous message (by thread): [cjwatson@debian.org: Bug-Squashing Party #7 report]
- Next message (by thread): [cjwatson@debian.org: Bug-Squashing Party #7 report]
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
On Wed, Feb 20, 2002 at 10:31:11AM +0000, Phil Blundell wrote: > On Wed, 2002-02-20 at 00:32, Christopher C. Chimelis wrote: > > On Tue, 19 Feb 2002, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote: > > > As I am trying to push binutils 2.12 (prerelease, at least) out within > > > the next two weeks, I'd appreciate details... Does it at least show up > > > in the ld testsuite? > > > > Not from what I gather. My ARM isn't running yet, so Philip will have to > > provide more info on that front. > > I haven't actually checked yet but I'd be surprised if it shows up in > the testsuite. > > Here's a testcase in C. Compile it with "gcc -fPIC". The number it > prints should be a valid address - the exact value isn't very exciting, > so long as it isn't zero. > > [ For those just tuning in, more details of this bug are at: > http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=134241&repeatmerged=yes > ] Tell me more. Apparently both you and Chris can reproduce this, but I can't: Relocation section '.rel.got' at offset 0x294 contains 2 entries: Offset Info Type Symbol's Value Symbol's Name 0001068c 00000615 R_ARM_GLOB_DAT 000084e0 foo This is using the 2.12 branch. Maybe it's something introduced in HJ's versions? -- Daniel Jacobowitz Carnegie Mellon University MontaVista Software Debian GNU/Linux Developer
- Previous message (by thread): [cjwatson@debian.org: Bug-Squashing Party #7 report]
- Next message (by thread): [cjwatson@debian.org: Bug-Squashing Party #7 report]
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
More information about the Binutils mailing list