Re: [cjwatson@debian.org: Bug-Squashing Party #7 report]

["H . J . Lu" <hjl at lucon dot org>]

On Sat, Feb 23, 2002 at 12:30:39AM -0500, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
> 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?           

I don't believe I have any ARM related changes in 2.11.93.0.2. However,
it is based on the 20020207 CVS.



H.J.