Hi,

I was just wondering if I should submit a bug report for
sys-devel/gcc-4.1.2 on Gentoo's main bugzilla -


it's exactly the same problem found here:

http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=422971

and I've traced it to

gcc-4.1.2-patches-1.0.2.tar.bz2/patch/62_all_gcc4-noteGNUstack.patch


Incorrect:
================================================== =================
--- libffi/src/arm/sysv.S.jj 2004-10-28 15:10:11.000000000 +0200
+++ libffi/src/arm/sysv.S 2005-02-08 16:14:02.282767581 +0100
@@ -207,3 +207,6 @@ LSYM(Lepilogue):
.ffi_call_SYSV_end:
.size
CNAME(ffi_call_SYSV),.ffi_call_SYSV_end-CNAME(ffi_call_SYSV)


+#if defined __ELF__ && defined __linux__
+ .section .note.GNU-stack,"",@progbits
+#endif
================================================== =================
Correct:
================================================== =================
--- libffi/src/arm/sysv.S.jj 2004-10-28 15:10:11.000000000 +0200
+++ libffi/src/arm/sysv.S 2005-02-08 16:14:02.282767581 +0100
@@ -207,3 +207,6 @@ LSYM(Lepilogue):
.ffi_call_SYSV_end:
.size
CNAME(ffi_call_SYSV),.ffi_call_SYSV_end-CNAME(ffi_call_SYSV)


+#if defined __ELF__ && defined __linux__
+ .section .note.GNU-stack,"",%progbits
+#endif
================================================== =================

There are several similar patches in that file, and they all share the
same syntax, so I would imagine that all of the lines containing


+ .section .note.GNU-stack,"",@progbits

are incorrect in the whole patch file, but I cannot confirm.

~/Chris
--
gentoo-embedded@lists.gentoo.org mailing list