[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Bug ld/12562] Ld.dk fails with "could not read symbols: Bad value" mess
From: |
davek at gcc dot gnu.org |
Subject: |
[Bug ld/12562] Ld.dk fails with "could not read symbols: Bad value" message |
Date: |
Sat, 12 Mar 2011 03:05:13 +0000 |
http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=12562
Dave Korn <davek at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
AssignedTo|unassigned at sources dot |davek at gcc dot gnu.org
|redhat.com |
--- Comment #4 from Dave Korn <davek at gcc dot gnu.org> 2011-03-12 03:05:03
UTC ---
Created attachment 5298
--> http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=5298
Fix typo in 003ld-plugin-api-link-order.diff
There was a typo in 003ld-plugin-api-link-order.diff, at the point where it has
to open the new files that were added by the plugin through the add_input_file
callback; it starts at the wrong point in the chain of input files, reopening
the existing ones before it reaches the newly-added files. Reopening the
object files is ignored, but reopening the libraries causes them to be
rescanned, and since toupper still isn't defined at this point - the ltrans.o
file not having been opened yet - when we reopen libxxx we pull in toupper.o
again (it already having been pulled in, then claimed by the plugin, first time
round). The backend complains about the same library module being supposedly
pulled in twice.
Solved by starting the reopen at the correct point, i.e. the old tail of the
list, which is where the new input files will have been added.
--
Configure bugmail: http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.
- [Bug ld/12562] New: Ld.dk fails with "could not read symbols: Bad value" message, d.g.gorbachev at gmail dot com, 2011/03/10
- [Bug ld/12562] Ld.dk fails with "could not read symbols: Bad value" message, davek at gcc dot gnu.org, 2011/03/10
- [Bug ld/12562] Ld.dk fails with "could not read symbols: Bad value" message, davek at gcc dot gnu.org, 2011/03/10
- [Bug ld/12562] Ld.dk fails with "could not read symbols: Bad value" message, d.g.gorbachev at gmail dot com, 2011/03/11
- [Bug ld/12562] Ld.dk fails with "could not read symbols: Bad value" message,
davek at gcc dot gnu.org <=
- [Bug ld/12562] Ld.dk fails with "could not read symbols: Bad value" message, davek at gcc dot gnu.org, 2011/03/12
- [Bug ld/12562] Ld.dk fails with "could not read symbols: Bad value" message, davek at gcc dot gnu.org, 2011/03/12
- [Bug ld/12562] Ld.dk fails with "could not read symbols: Bad value" message, davek at gcc dot gnu.org, 2011/03/12
- [Bug ld/12562] Ld.dk fails with "could not read symbols: Bad value" message, d.g.gorbachev at gmail dot com, 2011/03/12
- [Bug ld/12562] Ld.dk fails with "could not read symbols: Bad value" message, davek at gcc dot gnu.org, 2011/03/12
- [Bug ld/12562] Ld.dk fails with "could not read symbols: Bad value" message, d.g.gorbachev at gmail dot com, 2011/03/12
- [Bug ld/12562] Ld.dk fails with "could not read symbols: Bad value" message, davek at gcc dot gnu.org, 2011/03/12