Linux Archive

Linux Archive (http://www.linux-archive.org/)
-   Gentoo Embedded (http://www.linux-archive.org/gentoo-embedded/)
-   -   bug introduced in GCC patches (http://www.linux-archive.org/gentoo-embedded/40493-bug-introduced-gcc-patches.html)

Ned Ludd 01-18-2008 03:39 AM

bug introduced in GCC patches
 
This absolutely should be reported to toolchain@gentoo via
https://bugs.gentoo.org


On Fri, 2008-01-18 at 05:05 +0100, Christopher Friedt wrote:
> 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

Mike Frysinger 01-18-2008 10:33 AM

bug introduced in GCC patches
 
On Thursday 17 January 2008, Christopher Friedt wrote:
> I was just wondering if I should submit a bug report for
> sys-devel/gcc-4.1.2 on Gentoo's main bugzilla -

yes

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

i just stole it from Fedora

> 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

blah, this gets screwed up often and only building for arm shows it. the
stupid arm assembler (unlike everyone else on the planet) uses @ as a comment
separator, so it needs to be changed to % for arm.

> 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.

it's only an issue on arm. this is why i try to use % in all my .S files
rather than @ as all assemblers treat % the same.
-mike

Christopher Friedt 01-19-2008 09:47 PM

bug introduced in GCC patches
 
Hi Ned,

I think it's been assigned to the toolchain folks already, but it's in
bugzilla at any rate:


http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=206525

Incidentally, there has been some talk that the included fastjar sources
have been taken out of upstream gcc, and they've resorted to using an
existing fastjar or jar detected by configure.


http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/java-patches/2006-q1/msg00381.html

I have a patch for gcc-4.1.2 to enable that as well.

http://vaiprime.visibleassets.com/~cfriedt/patches/gcc-4.1.2-externalize-jar.patch

When I tried to build with java support it failed all of the time before
I applied this patch. I guess the downside is that you'd need an
existing fastjar or jar binary on your build system.


Cheers,

Chris

Ned Ludd wrote:

This absolutely should be reported to toolchain@gentoo via
https://bugs.gentoo.org


On Fri, 2008-01-18 at 05:05 +0100, Christopher Friedt wrote:

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


All times are GMT. The time now is 10:20 PM.

VBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO ©2007, Crawlability, Inc.