From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: by sourceware.org (Postfix, from userid 48)
	id 7210D3858D20; Tue, 11 Jul 2023 11:57:31 +0000 (GMT)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 7210D3858D20
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gcc.gnu.org;
	s=default; t=1689076651;
	bh=HX8EKcSpk+l0a18Cbv7Xc7dHMJlXWf7ogwW1yCpHsj4=;
	h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From;
	b=ICI6F8IpoF8J7mVpbqGQTyQybalKyiWDi5O/sf0KNLLwvgV/NQGD7w3sUp0Wsx3U5
	 bur7GcWeNQbVobQoNLDd2S3nxp1i3WTCl1FrDazb6CzcqsOiZCysV/DkT18PtnQciT
	 GXlexXCNvQxgOmVgFI4itH8tT+VPhONqjfLf75NY=
From: "jahns at dkrz dot de" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug lto/109403] Alignment of common blocks not reported correctly
Date: Tue, 11 Jul 2023 11:57:30 +0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: lto
X-Bugzilla-Version: 11.2.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: 
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: jahns at dkrz dot de
X-Bugzilla-Status: NEW
X-Bugzilla-Resolution: 
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: ---
X-Bugzilla-Flags: 
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: 
Message-ID: <bug-109403-4-UhrprzL9mg@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-109403-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-109403-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Bugzilla-URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
MIME-Version: 1.0
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.sourceware.org>

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D109403

--- Comment #2 from Thomas Jahns <jahns at dkrz dot de> ---
Just for cross-referencing:

In the meantime, I found that someone else also ran into this problem when
using fat objects with binutils nm:

https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D24326

https://stackoverflow.com/questions/55126627=