From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 16441 invoked by alias); 6 May 2011 10:25:52 -0000 Received: (qmail 16431 invoked by uid 22791); 6 May 2011 10:25:51 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-1.6 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,FREEMAIL_FROM,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mx9.orcon.net.nz (HELO mx9.orcon.net.nz) (219.88.242.59) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Fri, 06 May 2011 10:25:37 +0000 Received: from Debian-exim by mx9.orcon.net.nz with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1QIIE3-000540-3T for binutils@sourceware.org; Fri, 06 May 2011 22:25:35 +1200 Received: from 60-234-221-162.bitstream.orcon.net.nz ([60.234.221.162] helo=[192.168.1.5]) by mx9.orcon.net.nz with esmtpa (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1QIIE2-00053e-Df; Fri, 06 May 2011 22:25:34 +1200 Message-ID: <4DC3CC9E.3080905@orcon.net.nz> Date: Fri, 06 May 2011 10:25:00 -0000 From: Michael Cree User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.9.1.16) Gecko/20110307 Icedove/3.0.11 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Richard Henderson CC: debian-alpha@lists.debian.org, binutils@sourceware.org Subject: Re: Problems with linker on Alpha References: <4DBCC489.9020602@orcon.net.nz> <4DBF055E.1070701@twiddle.net> <4DBFC90E.5090905@orcon.net.nz> In-Reply-To: <4DBFC90E.5090905@orcon.net.nz> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-DSPAM-Check: by mx9.orcon.net.nz on Fri, 06 May 2011 22:25:34 +1200 X-DSPAM-Result: Innocent X-DSPAM-Processed: Fri May 6 22:25:35 2011 X-DSPAM-Confidence: 0.5922 X-DSPAM-Probability: 0.0000 Mailing-List: contact binutils-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: binutils-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2011-05/txt/msg00074.txt.bz2 On 03/05/11 21:21, Michael Cree wrote: > On 03/05/11 07:26, Richard Henderson wrote: >> On 04/30/2011 07:25 PM, Michael Cree wrote: >>> Secondly, I noted a number of test suite failures in the ld component >>> while building binutils. > > Building binutils 2.21.51.20110419-2 from Debian (also with my fix tls > patch) I get: > > === ld tests === > > Running target unix > FAIL: Build libpr9676-4a.so It passes on amd64 and powerpc. Amd64 has in the readelf output of libpr9676-4a.so the following line: 52: 0000000000000650 6 FUNC LOCAL DEFAULT 12 foo (and similarly powerpc) which is tested for by (and matches) the following regular expression: +[0-9]+: +[0-9a-f]+ +[0-9a-f]+ +FUNC +LOCAL +DEFAULT +[0-9]+ +_?foo that is in pr9676.rd. But the output of readelf of libpr9676-4a.so on Alpha contains the following: 45: 00000000000007c0 8 FUNC LOCAL DEFAULT [: 80] 11 foo That is, it contains an extra "[: 80]" which does not match the regular expression in the test. So my question is, what is this "[: 80]"? Does it matter? Is this failure a false report? Cheers Michael.