2.41 branch approaching

2.41 branch approaching

[Nick Clifton]

Hi Guys,

   The 2.41 release is fast approaching.  My current plan is create
   the branch on July 2 and then release on July 23.  So if anyone
   has any new features that they want to see in the 2.41 release,
   now is the time to submit them for review or ping the maintainers
   if they are still waiting for a response.

Cheers
   Nick

Re: 2.41 branch approaching

[Indu Bhagat]

On 6/19/23 2:57 AM, Nick Clifton via Binutils wrote:
> Hi Guys,
> 
>    The 2.41 release is fast approaching.  My current plan is create
>    the branch on July 2 and then release on July 23.  So if anyone
>    has any new features that they want to see in the 2.41 release,
>    now is the time to submit them for review or ping the maintainers
>    if they are still waiting for a response.
> 
> Cheers
>    Nick
> 


I have some SFrame related patches in the works:
   - libsframe versioning and symbol versioning: This includes some ABI 
breaking changes.
   - SFrame version 2: Version bump for the format. And fixes for 
alignment related issues.

It should be done within the proposed timeline for the 2.41 release 
(fingers crossed).

Thanks
Indu

Re: 2.41 branch approaching

[Matthias Klose]

On 19.06.23 11:57, Nick Clifton via Binutils wrote:
> Hi Guys,
> 
>    The 2.41 release is fast approaching.  My current plan is create
>    the branch on July 2 and then release on July 23.  So if anyone
>    has any new features that they want to see in the 2.41 release,
>    now is the time to submit them for review or ping the maintainers
>    if they are still waiting for a response.

with a trunk 20230625 build in Debian unstable (GCC 12.3 defaulting to pie), I 
see the following results. Reporting regressions compared to the 2.40 branch.

   https://buildd.debian.org/status/package.php?p=binutils

https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30447 is seen on all 
architectures, however not yet reproducible. regressions from the 2.40 branch.

The addr2line failures are regressions compared to 20230611.

one patch missing a check in:
https://sourceware.org/pipermail/binutils/2023-June/127776.html

mips* shows 100+ regressions during the last two weeks. There must be better way 
to work through maintainer disagreements.

In particular,

x86_64-linux-gnu i686-linux-gnu x86_64-linux-gnux32
===================================================

Using /<<PKGBUILDDIR>>/binutils/testsuite/config/default.exp as 
tool-and-target-specific interfa
ce file.
Running /<<PKGBUILDDIR>>/binutils/testsuite/binutils-all/aarch64/aarch64.exp ...
Running /<<PKGBUILDDIR>>/binutils/testsuite/binutils-all/addr2line.exp ...
FAIL: addr2line 
./builddir-single/binutils/./binutils/testsuite/binutils-all/testprog.c:19

FAIL: addr2line -f option fn
./builddir-single/binutils/./binutils/testsuite/binutils-all/testprog.c:13

Version /<<PKGBUILDDIR>>/builddir-single/binutils/objdump 2.40.50.20230625
FAIL: objdump -S
FAIL: objdump --source-comment
Running /<<PKGBUILDDIR>>/ld/testsuite/ld-elf/shared.exp ...
FAIL: Dump pr21978.so


powerpc-linux-gnu, powerpc64-linux-gnu. powerpc64le-linux-gnu,
arm-linux-gnueabi, arm-linux-gnueabihf aarch64-linux-gnu
=============================================================

Running /<<PKGBUILDDIR>>/binutils/testsuite/binutils-all/addr2line.exp ...
FAIL: addr2line 
./builddir-single/binutils/./binutils/testsuite/binutils-all/testprog.c:19
FAIL: addr2line -f option fn
./builddir-single/binutils/./binutils/testsuite/binutils-all/testprog.c:13

Version /<<PKGBUILDDIR>>/builddir-single/binutils/objdump 2.40.50.20230625
FAIL: objdump -S
FAIL: objdump --source-comment

Running /<<PKGBUILDDIR>>/ld/testsuite/ld-elf/shared.exp ...
FAIL: Dump pr21978.so

s390x-linux-gnu
===============

Running /<<PKGBUILDDIR>>/binutils/testsuite/binutils-all/addr2line.exp ...
FAIL: addr2line 
./builddir-single/binutils/./binutils/testsuite/binutils-all/testprog.c:19
FAIL: addr2line -f option fn
./builddir-single/binutils/./binutils/testsuite/binutils-all/testprog.c:13

Version /<<PKGBUILDDIR>>/builddir-single/binutils/objdump 2.40.50.20230625
FAIL: objdump -S
FAIL: objdump --source-comment

Running /<<PKGBUILDDIR>>/ld/testsuite/ld-elf/shared.exp ...
FAIL: Dump pr21978.so
FAIL: pr26580-3
FAIL: Run pr21964-4


riscv64-linux-gnu
=================

Running /<<PKGBUILDDIR>>/binutils/testsuite/binutils-all/addr2line.exp ...
FAIL: addr2line 
./builddir-single/binutils/./binutils/testsuite/binutils-all/testprog.c:19

FAIL: addr2line -f option fn
./builddir-single/binutils/./binutils/testsuite/binutils-all/testprog.c:13

Version /<<PKGBUILDDIR>>/builddir-single/binutils/objdump 2.40.50.20230625
FAIL: objdump -S
FAIL: objdump --source-comment
Running /<<PKGBUILDDIR>>/ld/testsuite/ld-elf/shared.exp ...
FAIL: Dump pr21978.so
FAIL: Run pr21964-4

mipsel-linux-gnu
================

115 failures, 30 new regressions compared to trunk 20230611, please see the 
build log, searching for "test-summary".

mips64el-linux-gnu
==================

176 failures, 106 new regressions compared to trunk 20230611, please see the 
build log, searching for "test-summary".


ia64-linux-gnu
==============

Running /<<PKGBUILDDIR>>/binutils/testsuite/binutils-all/addr2line.exp ...
FAIL: addr2line 
./builddir-single/binutils/./binutils/testsuite/binutils-all/testprog.c:19

FAIL: addr2line -f option fn
./builddir-single/binutils/./binutils/testsuite/binutils-all/testprog.c:13

Version /<<PKGBUILDDIR>>/builddir-single/binutils/objdump 2.40.50.20230625
FAIL: objdump -S
FAIL: objdump --source-comment

Running /<<PKGBUILDDIR>>/ld/testsuite/ld-ctf/ctf.exp ...
FAIL: Arrays (conflicted)
FAIL: Conflicted data syms, partially indexed, stripped, with variables
FAIL: Conflicted data syms, partially indexed, stripped
FAIL: Nonrepresentable types
Running /<<PKGBUILDDIR>>/ld/testsuite/ld-elf/elf.exp ...
FAIL: PR ld/22269
FAIL: PR ld/22269 (-z dynamic-undefined-weak)
Running /<<PKGBUILDDIR>>/ld/testsuite/ld-elf/indirect.exp ...
FAIL: Run with libpr18720c.so 1
FAIL: Run with libpr18720c.so 2
FAIL: Run with libpr18720c.so 3
FAIL: Run with libpr18720c.so 4
FAIL: Run with libpr18720c.so 5
Running /<<PKGBUILDDIR>>/ld/testsuite/ld-elf/shared.exp ...
FAIL: DT_TEXTREL map file warning
FAIL: Dump pr21978.so
FAIL: pr22269-1 (static pie undefined weak)
FAIL: Run pr18718
FAIL: Run pr18718 (-z now)
FAIL: Run pr18718 with PIE (1)
FAIL: Run pr18718 with PIE (2)
FAIL: Run pr18718 with PIE (3)
FAIL: Run pr18718 with PIE (4)
FAIL: Run pr18718 with PIC (1)
FAIL: Run pr18718 with PIC (2)
FAIL: Run pr18718 with PIC (3)
FAIL: Run pr18718 with PIC (4)
FAIL: Build pr23162a
FAIL: Build pr23162b
FAIL: Build libpr23161a.so
FAIL: Build pr23161a
FAIL: Build libpr23161b.so
FAIL: Build pr23161b
Running /<<PKGBUILDDIR>>/ld/testsuite/ld-ifunc/ifunc.exp ...
FAIL: ifunc-using shared library does not contain R_*_IRELATIVE relocation
FAIL: Local ifunc-using executable does not contain R_*_IRELATIVE relocation
FAIL: Static ifunc-using executable does not contain R_*_IRELATIVE relocation


alpha-linux-gnu
===============

Version /<<PKGBUILDDIR>>/builddir-single/binutils/objdump 2.40.50.20230625
FAIL: objdump -S
FAIL: objdump --source-comment

Running /<<PKGBUILDDIR>>/ld/testsuite/ld-elf/shared.exp ...
FAIL: Dump pr21978.so
Running /<<PKGBUILDDIR>>/ld/testsuite/ld-plugin/plugin.exp ...
FAIL: plugin claimfile lost symbol
FAIL: plugin claimfile replace symbol
FAIL: plugin claimfile resolve symbol
FAIL: plugin claimfile lost symbol with source
FAIL: plugin claimfile replace symbol with source
FAIL: plugin claimfile resolve symbol with source
FAIL: plugin 2 with source lib
FAIL: load plugin 2 with source
FAIL: plugin 3 with source lib
FAIL: load plugin 3 with source

m68k-linux-gnu
==============

Running /<<PKGBUILDDIR>>/binutils/testsuite/binutils-all/addr2line.exp ...
FAIL: addr2line 
./builddir-single/binutils/./binutils/testsuite/binutils-all/testprog.c:19


FAIL: addr2line -f option fn
./builddir-single/binutils/./binutils/testsuite/binutils-all/testprog.c:13

Running /<<PKGBUILDDIR>>/binutils/testsuite/binutils-all/objdump.exp ...
Version /<<PKGBUILDDIR>>/builddir-single/binutils/objdump 2.40.50.20230625
FAIL: objdump -S
FAIL: objdump --source-comment

Running /<<PKGBUILDDIR>>/ld/testsuite/ld-elf/dwarf.exp ...
FAIL: Handle no DWARF information
Running /<<PKGBUILDDIR>>/ld/testsuite/ld-elf/indirect.exp ...
FAIL: Run indirect5 3
FAIL: Run indirect5 4
FAIL: Run indirect6 3
FAIL: Run indirect6 4
FAIL: indirect5c dynsym
FAIL: indirect5d dynsym
FAIL: indirect6c dynsym
FAIL: indirect6d dynsym
Running /<<PKGBUILDDIR>>/ld/testsuite/ld-elf/shared.exp ...
FAIL: DT_TEXTREL map file warning
FAIL: pr20995
FAIL: pr20995-2
FAIL: Dump pr21978.so
FAIL: pr22269-1 (static pie undefined weak)
FAIL: Run pr2404 with PIE
FAIL: Run pr2404 with PIE (-z now)
FAIL: Run pr19719 fun undefined
Running /<<PKGBUILDDIR>>/ld/testsuite/ld-m68k/m68k.exp ...
FAIL: ld-m68k/tls-gd-2
FAIL: ld-m68k/tls-gd-ie-1
FAIL: ld-m68k/tls-ie-1
FAIL: ld-m68k/tls-ld-1


sparc64-linux-gnu
=================

Running /<<PKGBUILDDIR>>/binutils/testsuite/binutils-all/addr2line.exp ...
FAIL: addr2line 
./builddir-single/binutils/./binutils/testsuite/binutils-all/testprog.c:19

FAIL: addr2line -f option fn
./builddir-single/binutils/./binutils/testsuite/binutils-all/testprog.c:13

Running /<<PKGBUILDDIR>>/binutils/testsuite/binutils-all/objdump.exp ...
Version /<<PKGBUILDDIR>>/builddir-single/binutils/objdump 2.40.50.20230625
FAIL: objdump -S
FAIL: objdump --source-comment
Running /<<PKGBUILDDIR>>/ld/testsuite/ld-elf/shared.exp ...
FAIL: Dump pr21978.so

sh4-linux-gnu
=============

Running /<<PKGBUILDDIR>>/binutils/testsuite/binutils-all/addr2line.exp ...
FAIL: addr2line 
./builddir-single/binutils/./binutils/testsuite/binutils-all/testprog.c:19


FAIL: addr2line -f option fn
./builddir-single/binutils/./binutils/testsuite/binutils-all/testprog.c:13

Version /<<PKGBUILDDIR>>/builddir-single/binutils/objdump 2.40.50.20230625
FAIL: objdump -S
FAIL: objdump --source-comment

Running /<<PKGBUILDDIR>>/ld/testsuite/ld-bootstrap/bootstrap.exp ...
WARNING: program timed out
FAIL: bootstrap
WARNING: program timed out
FAIL: bootstrap with strip
WARNING: program timed out
FAIL: bootstrap with -Wl,--traditional-format
WARNING: program timed out
FAIL: bootstrap with -Wl,--no-keep-memory
WARNING: program timed out
FAIL: bootstrap with -Wl,--relax
WARNING: program timed out
FAIL: bootstrap with -Wl,--max-cache-size=-1
Running /<<PKGBUILDDIR>>/ld/testsuite/ld-elf/dwarf.exp ...
FAIL: Handle no DWARF information
Running /<<PKGBUILDDIR>>/ld/testsuite/ld-elf/shared.exp ...
FAIL: pr20995
FAIL: pr20995-2
FAIL: Dump pr21978.so
FAIL: pr22269-1 (static pie undefined weak)
FAIL: Run pr19579
FAIL: Run pr19579 (-z now)
FAIL: Run pr19719 fun undefined
Running /<<PKGBUILDDIR>>/ld/testsuite/ld-plugin/lto.exp ...
FAIL: PR ld/12760

i686-gnu
========

Running /<<PKGBUILDDIR>>/binutils/testsuite/binutils-all/addr2line.exp ...
FAIL: addr2line 
./builddir-single/binutils/./binutils/testsuite/binutils-all/testprog.c:19

FAIL: addr2line -f option fn
./builddir-single/binutils/./binutils/testsuite/binutils-all/testprog.c:13

Running /<<PKGBUILDDIR>>/ld/testsuite/ld-bootstrap/bootstrap.exp ...
FAIL: bootstrap
FAIL: bootstrap with strip
FAIL: bootstrap with -Wl,--traditional-format
FAIL: bootstrap with -Wl,--no-keep-memory
FAIL: bootstrap with -Wl,--relax
FAIL: bootstrap with -Wl,--max-cache-size=-1
Running /<<PKGBUILDDIR>>/ld/testsuite/ld-elf/dt-relr.exp ...
FAIL: Build dt-relr-glibc-1b.so
Running /<<PKGBUILDDIR>>/ld/testsuite/ld-elf/shared.exp ...
FAIL: Dump pr21978.so
Running /<<PKGBUILDDIR>>/ld/testsuite/ld-i386/no-plt.exp ...
FAIL: Run pr20253-1a

Re: 2.41 branch approaching

[Nick Clifton]

Hi Matthias,

> In particular,
> 
> x86_64-linux-gnu i686-linux-gnu x86_64-linux-gnux32
> ===================================================
> 
> Using /<<PKGBUILDDIR>>/binutils/testsuite/config/default.exp as tool-and-target-specific interfa
> ce file.
> Running /<<PKGBUILDDIR>>/binutils/testsuite/binutils-all/aarch64/aarch64.exp ...
> Running /<<PKGBUILDDIR>>/binutils/testsuite/binutils-all/addr2line.exp ...
> FAIL: addr2line ./builddir-single/binutils/./binutils/testsuite/binutils-all/testprog.c:19
> 
> FAIL: addr2line -f option fn
> ./builddir-single/binutils/./binutils/testsuite/binutils-all/testprog.c:13
> 
> Version /<<PKGBUILDDIR>>/builddir-single/binutils/objdump 2.40.50.20230625
> FAIL: objdump -S
> FAIL: objdump --source-comment
> Running /<<PKGBUILDDIR>>/ld/testsuite/ld-elf/shared.exp ...
> FAIL: Dump pr21978.so

I am not seeing these failures.  Can you tell me how the builds
are configured ?

Maybe the problem is related to the compiler that is being used to
compile the test code ?  Perhaps the regexps in the tests need to
be adjusted to allow for discrepancies in compiler behaviour ?
(This is just a guess).

Can you supply the binutils.log file for a failing test run so
that I can take a look ?

Cheers
   Nick

Re: 2.41 branch approaching

[Matthias Klose]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2139 bytes --]

On 28.06.23 12:58, Nick Clifton wrote:
> Hi Matthias,
> 
>> In particular,
>>
>> x86_64-linux-gnu i686-linux-gnu x86_64-linux-gnux32
>> ===================================================
>>
>> Using /<<PKGBUILDDIR>>/binutils/testsuite/config/default.exp as 
>> tool-and-target-specific interfa
>> ce file.
>> Running /<<PKGBUILDDIR>>/binutils/testsuite/binutils-all/aarch64/aarch64.exp ...
>> Running /<<PKGBUILDDIR>>/binutils/testsuite/binutils-all/addr2line.exp ...
>> FAIL: addr2line 
>> ./builddir-single/binutils/./binutils/testsuite/binutils-all/testprog.c:19
>>
>> FAIL: addr2line -f option fn
>> ./builddir-single/binutils/./binutils/testsuite/binutils-all/testprog.c:13
>>
>> Version /<<PKGBUILDDIR>>/builddir-single/binutils/objdump 2.40.50.20230625
>> FAIL: objdump -S
>> FAIL: objdump --source-comment
>> Running /<<PKGBUILDDIR>>/ld/testsuite/ld-elf/shared.exp ...
>> FAIL: Dump pr21978.so
> 
> I am not seeing these failures.  Can you tell me how the builds
> are configured ?

../configure --with-sysroot=/ \
                 --libdir=/usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu \
                 --disable-silent-rules --enable-obsolete --enable-shared 
--enable-plugins --enable-threads --enable-jansson --with-system-zlib 
--prefix=/usr --sysconfdir=/etc --enable-deterministic-archives 
--disable-compressed-debug-sections --enable-new-dtags --disable-x86-used-note 
--with-gold-ldflags=-static-libstdc++ --build=x86_64-linux-gnu 
--host=x86_64-linux-gnu --with-pkgversion="GNU Binutils for Debian" 
--disable-werror --enable-targets=x86_64-linux-gnux32,x86_64-pep 
--enable-ld=default --enable-gold --enable-pgo-build=lto --enable-gprofng

> Maybe the problem is related to the compiler that is being used to
> compile the test code ?  Perhaps the regexps in the tests need to
> be adjusted to allow for discrepancies in compiler behaviour ?
> (This is just a guess).

this is GCC 12.3, configured with --enable-default-pie

> Can you supply the binutils.log file for a failing test run so
> that I can take a look ?

attached, however it only points to the first fail in these two test cases.

Matthias

> 
> Cheers
>    Nick
> 
> 

[-- Attachment #2: binutils.log.gz --]
[-- Type: application/gzip, Size: 99602 bytes --]

Re: 2.41 branch approaching

[Nick Clifton]

Hi Matthias,

>> Can you supply the binutils.log file for a failing test run so
>> that I can take a look ?
> 
> attached, however it only points to the first fail in these two test cases.
Hmm, OK, so if I am reading the log correctly the addr2line failures are
happening because running:

   addr2line -e tmpdir/testprog <some address>

returns:

   ./builddir-single/binutils/./binutils/testsuite/binutils-all/testprog.c:<some line number>

whereas the regexp is expecting to match:

  "$srcdir/$subdir/testprog.c:\[0-9\]+"

which translates to:

   /home/packages/binutils/binutils-2.40.50.20230628/binutils/testsuite/binutils-all/testprog.c:[0-9]+

Looking back in the log I notice that the test program is being compiled
with:

   x86_64-linux-gnu-gcc \
    /home/packages/binutils/binutils-2.40.50.20230628/binutils/testsuite/binutils-all/testprog.c \
    -g \
    -O2 \
    -ffile-prefix-map=/home/packages/binutils/binutils-2.40.50.20230628=. \
    -O0 \
    -g \
    -lm \
    -o tmpdir/testprog

(I added the backslash line separators).

And so the culprit appears to be the -ffile-prefix-map... option.  Which I think
must be coming from your environment as it is not a normal part of the binutils
testsuite.

Does this make sense ?

I suspect that the same problem explains why the objdump+source+listing tests
are failing.  The sources are not where the built binaries are saying that they
should be.

Cheers
   Nick

Re: 2.41 branch approaching

[Matthias Klose]

On 28.06.23 17:59, Nick Clifton via Binutils wrote:
> Hi Matthias,
> 
>>> Can you supply the binutils.log file for a failing test run so
>>> that I can take a look ?
>>
>> attached, however it only points to the first fail in these two test cases.
> Hmm, OK, so if I am reading the log correctly the addr2line failures are
> happening because running:
> 
>    addr2line -e tmpdir/testprog <some address>
> 
> returns:
> 
>    ./builddir-single/binutils/./binutils/testsuite/binutils-all/testprog.c:<some 
> line number>
> 
> whereas the regexp is expecting to match:
> 
>   "$srcdir/$subdir/testprog.c:\[0-9\]+"
> 
> which translates to:
> 
>    
> /home/packages/binutils/binutils-2.40.50.20230628/binutils/testsuite/binutils-all/testprog.c:[0-9]+
> 
> Looking back in the log I notice that the test program is being compiled
> with:
> 
>    x86_64-linux-gnu-gcc \
>     
> /home/packages/binutils/binutils-2.40.50.20230628/binutils/testsuite/binutils-all/testprog.c \
>     -g \
>     -O2 \
>     -ffile-prefix-map=/home/packages/binutils/binutils-2.40.50.20230628=. \
>     -O0 \
>     -g \
>     -lm \
>     -o tmpdir/testprog
> 
> (I added the backslash line separators).
> 
> And so the culprit appears to be the -ffile-prefix-map... option.  Which I think
> must be coming from your environment as it is not a normal part of the binutils
> testsuite.
> 
> Does this make sense ?

yes, this is passed by the general Debian build env:

$ dpkg-buildflags
ASFLAGS=
CFLAGS=-g -O2 
-ffile-prefix-map=/home/packages/binutils/binutils-2.40.50.20230628=. 
-fstack-protector-strong -Wformat -Werror=format-security
CPPFLAGS=-Wdate-time -D_FORTIFY_SOURCE=2
CXXFLAGS=-g -O2 
-ffile-prefix-map=/home/packages/binutils/binutils-2.40.50.20230628=. 
-fstack-protector-strong -Wformat -Werror=format-security
DFLAGS=-frelease
FCFLAGS=-g -O2 
-ffile-prefix-map=/home/packages/binutils/binutils-2.40.50.20230628=. 
-fstack-protector-strong
FFLAGS=-g -O2 
-ffile-prefix-map=/home/packages/binutils/binutils-2.40.50.20230628=. 
-fstack-protector-strong
GCJFLAGS=-g -O2 
-ffile-prefix-map=/home/packages/binutils/binutils-2.40.50.20230628=. 
-fstack-protector-strong
LDFLAGS=-Wl,-z,relro
OBJCFLAGS=-g -O2 
-ffile-prefix-map=/home/packages/binutils/binutils-2.40.50.20230628=. 
-fstack-protector-strong -Wformat -Werror=format-security
OBJCXXFLAGS=-g -O2 
-ffile-prefix-map=/home/packages/binutils/binutils-2.40.50.20230628=. 
-fstack-protector-strong -Wformat -Werror=format-security

these flags are set to ensure reproducible builds, and to inject hardening 
compiler flags.

> I suspect that the same problem explains why the objdump+source+listing tests
> are failing.  The sources are not where the built binaries are saying that they
> should be.

these injected flags are nothing new, I just fail to understand why these tests 
are failing now, and not before. I don't see any changes in the tests, and 2.40 
passed these tests with the same flags.

Matthias

Re: 2.41 branch approaching

[Matthias Klose]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1657 bytes --]

On 28.06.23 17:59, Nick Clifton wrote:
> Hi Matthias,
> 
>>> Can you supply the binutils.log file for a failing test run so
>>> that I can take a look ?
>>
>> attached, however it only points to the first fail in these two test cases.
> Hmm, OK, so if I am reading the log correctly the addr2line failures are
> happening because running:
> 
>    addr2line -e tmpdir/testprog <some address>
> 
> returns:
> 
>    ./builddir-single/binutils/./binutils/testsuite/binutils-all/testprog.c:<some 
> line number>
> 
> whereas the regexp is expecting to match:
> 
>   "$srcdir/$subdir/testprog.c:\[0-9\]+"
> 
> which translates to:
> 
>    
> /home/packages/binutils/binutils-2.40.50.20230628/binutils/testsuite/binutils-all/testprog.c:[0-9]+
> 
> Looking back in the log I notice that the test program is being compiled
> with:
> 
>    x86_64-linux-gnu-gcc \
>     
> /home/packages/binutils/binutils-2.40.50.20230628/binutils/testsuite/binutils-all/testprog.c \
>     -g \
>     -O2 \
>     -ffile-prefix-map=/home/packages/binutils/binutils-2.40.50.20230628=. \
>     -O0 \
>     -g \
>     -lm \
>     -o tmpdir/testprog
> 
> (I added the backslash line separators).
> 
> And so the culprit appears to be the -ffile-prefix-map... option.  Which I think
> must be coming from your environment as it is not a normal part of the binutils
> testsuite.
> 
> Does this make sense ?
> 
> I suspect that the same problem explains why the objdump+source+listing tests
> are failing.  The sources are not where the built binaries are saying that they
> should be.

yes, now explicitly filtering out this flag for the tests, patch attached.

Matthias

[-- Attachment #2: check-without-file-prefix-map.diff --]
[-- Type: text/x-patch, Size: 2204 bytes --]

--- a/binutils/Makefile.am
+++ b/binutils/Makefile.am
@@ -214,7 +214,7 @@ check-DEJAGNU: site.exp
 		CC="$(CC)" CFLAGS="$(CFLAGS)" \
 		CC_FOR_BUILD="$(CC_FOR_BUILD)" \
 		CC_FOR_TARGET="$(CC_FOR_TARGET)" \
-		CFLAGS_FOR_TARGET="$(CFLAGS_FOR_TARGET) -O0" \
+		CFLAGS_FOR_TARGET="$(filter-out -ffile-prefix-map=%,$(CFLAGS_FOR_TARGET)) -O0" \
 		$(RUNTESTFLAGS); \
 	else echo "WARNING: could not find \`runtest'" 1>&2; :;\
 	fi
--- a/binutils/Makefile.in
+++ b/binutils/Makefile.in
@@ -1840,7 +1840,7 @@ check-DEJAGNU: site.exp
 		CC="$(CC)" CFLAGS="$(CFLAGS)" \
 		CC_FOR_BUILD="$(CC_FOR_BUILD)" \
 		CC_FOR_TARGET="$(CC_FOR_TARGET)" \
-		CFLAGS_FOR_TARGET="$(CFLAGS_FOR_TARGET) -O0" \
+		CFLAGS_FOR_TARGET="$(filter-out -ffile-prefix-map=%,$(CFLAGS_FOR_TARGET)) -O0" \
 		$(RUNTESTFLAGS); \
 	else echo "WARNING: could not find \`runtest'" 1>&2; :;\
 	fi
--- a/ld/Makefile.am
+++ b/ld/Makefile.am
@@ -992,9 +992,9 @@ check-DEJAGNU: site.exp
 		CC="$(CC)" CFLAGS="$(CFLAGS)" \
 		CXX="$(CXX)" CXXFLAGS="$(CXXFLAGS)" \
 		CC_FOR_TARGET="$(CC_FOR_TARGET)" \
-		CFLAGS_FOR_TARGET="$(CFLAGS_FOR_TARGET)" \
+		CFLAGS_FOR_TARGET="$(filter-out -ffile-prefix-map=%,$(CFLAGS_FOR_TARGET))" \
 		CXX_FOR_TARGET="$(CXX_FOR_TARGET)" \
-		CXXFLAGS_FOR_TARGET="$(CXXFLAGS_FOR_TARGET)" \
+		CXXFLAGS_FOR_TARGET="$(filter-out -ffile-prefix-map=%,$(CXXFLAGS_FOR_TARGET))" \
 		OFILES="$(OFILES)" BFDLIB="$(TESTBFDLIB)" CTFLIB="$(TESTCTFLIB) $(ZLIB)" \
 		SFRAMELIB="$(TESTSFRAMELIB)" \
 		JANSSON_LIBS="$(JANSSON_LIBS)" ZSTD_LIBS="$(ZSTD_LIBS)" \
--- a/ld/Makefile.in
+++ b/ld/Makefile.in
@@ -2690,9 +2690,9 @@ check-DEJAGNU: site.exp
 		CC="$(CC)" CFLAGS="$(CFLAGS)" \
 		CXX="$(CXX)" CXXFLAGS="$(CXXFLAGS)" \
 		CC_FOR_TARGET="$(CC_FOR_TARGET)" \
-		CFLAGS_FOR_TARGET="$(CFLAGS_FOR_TARGET)" \
+		CFLAGS_FOR_TARGET="$(filter-out -ffile-prefix-map=%,$(CFLAGS_FOR_TARGET))" \
 		CXX_FOR_TARGET="$(CXX_FOR_TARGET)" \
-		CXXFLAGS_FOR_TARGET="$(CXXFLAGS_FOR_TARGET)" \
+		CXXFLAGS_FOR_TARGET="$(filter-out -ffile-prefix-map=%,$(CXXFLAGS_FOR_TARGET))" \
 		OFILES="$(OFILES)" BFDLIB="$(TESTBFDLIB)" CTFLIB="$(TESTCTFLIB) $(ZLIB)" \
 		SFRAMELIB="$(TESTSFRAMELIB)" \
 		JANSSON_LIBS="$(JANSSON_LIBS)" ZSTD_LIBS="$(ZSTD_LIBS)" \

Re: 2.41 branch approaching

[Nick Clifton]

Hi Matthias,

> yes, now explicitly filtering out this flag for the tests, patch attached.

That works for me.  Patch approved - please apply.

Cheers
   Nick