Warning, /frameworks/syndication/autotests/additional/gmane.comp.gnu.binutils.xml is written in an unsupported language. File is not indexed.

0001 <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
0002 <rdf:RDF xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/" xmlns:taxo="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/taxonomy/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:syn="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/" xmlns:admin="http://webns.net/mvcb/">
0003   <channel about="http://blog.gmane.org/gmane.comp.gnu.binutils">
0004     <title>gmane.comp.gnu.binutils</title>
0005     <link>http://blog.gmane.org/gmane.comp.gnu.binutils</link>
0006     <description/>
0007     <syn:updatePeriod>hourly</syn:updatePeriod>
0008     <syn:updateFrequency>1</syn:updateFrequency>
0009     <syn:updateBase>1901-01-01T00:00+00:00</syn:updateBase>
0010     <items>
0011       <rdf:Seq>
0012         <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.comp.gnu.binutils/32040"/>
0013         <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.comp.gnu.binutils/32039"/>
0014         <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.comp.gnu.binutils/32038"/>
0015         <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.comp.gnu.binutils/32037"/>
0016         <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.comp.gnu.binutils/32036"/>
0017         <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.comp.gnu.binutils/32026"/>
0018         <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.comp.gnu.binutils/32023"/>
0019         <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.comp.gnu.binutils/32019"/>
0020         <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.comp.gnu.binutils/32017"/>
0021         <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.comp.gnu.binutils/32012"/>
0022         <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.comp.gnu.binutils/32010"/>
0023         <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.comp.gnu.binutils/32009"/>
0024         <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.comp.gnu.binutils/32006"/>
0025         <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.comp.gnu.binutils/32002"/>
0026         <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.comp.gnu.binutils/31993"/>
0027         <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.comp.gnu.binutils/31970"/>
0028         <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.comp.gnu.binutils/31968"/>
0029         <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.comp.gnu.binutils/31957"/>
0030         <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.comp.gnu.binutils/31955"/>
0031         <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.comp.gnu.binutils/31954"/>
0032       </rdf:Seq>
0033     </items>
0034     <image rdf:resource="http://gmane.org/img/gmane-25t.png"/>
0035     <textinput rdf:resource=""/>
0036   </channel>
0037   <image rdf:about="http://gmane.org/img/gmane-25t.png">
0038     <title>Gmane</title>
0039     <url>http://gmane.org/img/gmane-25t.png</url>
0040     <link>http://gmane.org</link>
0041   </image>
0042   <item rdf:about="http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.comp.gnu.binutils/32040">
0043     <title>Fix Thumb gas segfault</title>
0044     <link>http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.comp.gnu.binutils/32040</link>
0045     <description>The ARM non-unified assembler assumes that Thumb ldm/stm always use the ia 
0046 addressing mode. Other addressing modes are only available on Thumb-2, and 
0047 you're supposed to use unified mode for that.
0048 
0049 The patch below makes gas issue an appropriate error rather than segfaulting 
0050 on the 32-bit encodings.
0051 
0052 Tested with cross to arm-none-eabi.
0053 Applied to head.
0054 
0055 Paul
0056 
0057 2007-03-24  Paul Brook  &lt;paul&lt; at &gt;codesourcery.com&gt;
0058 
0059 * config/tc-arm.c (do_t_ldmstm): Error on Thumb-2 addressing modes.
0060 
0061 Index: gas/config/tc-arm.c
0062 ===================================================================
0063 --- gas/config/tc-arm.c(revision 166694)
0064 +++ gas/config/tc-arm.c(working copy)
0065 &lt; at &gt;&lt; at &gt; -9121,6 +9136,9 &lt; at &gt;&lt; at &gt; do_t_ldmstm (void)
0066      {
0067        constraint (inst.operands[0].reg &gt; 7
0068    || (inst.operands[1].imm &amp; ~0xff), BAD_HIREG);
0069 +      constraint (inst.instruction != T_MNEM_ldmia
0070 +  &amp;&amp; inst.instruction != T_MNEM_stmia,
0071 +  _("Thumb-2 instruction only valid in unified syntax"));
0072        if (inst.instruction == T_MNEM_stmia)
0073  {
0074    if (!inst.ope</description>
0075     <dc:creator>Paul Brook</dc:creator>
0076     <dc:date>2007-03-24T16:14:04</dc:date>
0077   </item>
0078   <item rdf:about="http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.comp.gnu.binutils/32039">
0079     <title>The Account Officer, Mr. Jeshly Dulugah is informed on this, contact him</title>
0080     <link>http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.comp.gnu.binutils/32039</link>
0081     <description>Message-Id: &lt;20070324122054.6874CA83E0&lt; at &gt;www1.celeonet.fr&gt;
0082 Date: Sat, 24 Mar 2007 13:20:54 +0100 (CET)
0083 
0084 Greetings!
0085 
0086 
0087 
0088 I could not get connected to you on phone, I decided to send this 
0089 
0090 email.Bearing in mind the staunch commitment that you have made to see that 
0091 
0092 the fund was sent to you for claim as arranged, but was hijacked by 
0093 
0094 scam, conmen and impostors; I write to inform you that at last, all has 
0095 
0096 been a SUCCESS.
0097 
0098 
0099 
0100 Since all our efforts didn't work, there was an nfluential Financial 
0101 
0102 consulting firm (Finance &amp; Management Supports Initiatives) by their 
0103 
0104 imputs, the whole Fund payment was concluded.
0105 
0106 
0107 
0108 Presently, I am in Bolivar where, in partnership with a core investor 
0109 
0110 in the Mining Sector of their economy, we are investing in the 
0111 
0112 industry.At times, I will be in the site and the Internet does not work there 
0113 
0114 only when I am in the city.
0115 
0116 
0117 
0118 There is communication problem in the Mining site in the undulating 
0119 
0120 highlands village in Cuchilla la Terrodoma district, because of the remote 
0121 
0122 and rugged t</description>
0123     <dc:creator>Namka Duff</dc:creator>
0124     <dc:date>2007-03-24T14:20:38</dc:date>
0125   </item>
0126   <item rdf:about="http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.comp.gnu.binutils/32038">
0127     <title>The Account Officer, Mr. Jeshly Dulugah is informed on this, contact him</title>
0128     <link>http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.comp.gnu.binutils/32038</link>
0129     <description>Greetings!
0130 
0131 I could not get connected to you on phone, I decided to send this 
0132 email.Bearing in mind the staunch commitment that you have made to see that 
0133 the fund was sent to you for claim as arranged, but was hijacked by 
0134 scam, conmen and impostors; I write to inform you that at last, all has 
0135 been a SUCCESS.
0136 
0137 Since all our efforts didn't work, there was an nfluential Financial 
0138 consulting firm (Finance &amp; Management Supports Initiatives) by their 
0139 imputs, the whole Fund payment was concluded.
0140 
0141 Presently, I am in Bolivar where, in partnership with a core investor 
0142 in the Mining Sector of their economy, we are investing in the 
0143 industry.At times, I will be in the site and the Internet does not work there 
0144 only when I am in the city.
0145 
0146 There is communication problem in the Mining site in the undulating 
0147 highlands village in Cuchilla la Terrodoma district, because of the remote 
0148 and rugged terrain of the location from the Country mainlands. And our 
0149 woes are compounded by the Bolivarian government obnoxious st</description>
0150     <dc:creator>Namka Duff</dc:creator>
0151     <dc:date>2007-03-24T12:21:39</dc:date>
0152   </item>
0153   <item rdf:about="http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.comp.gnu.binutils/32037">
0154     <title>ARM disassembler crash</title>
0155     <link>http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.comp.gnu.binutils/32037</link>
0156     <description>The attached patch fixes a crash when disassembling unusual forms of the ARM 
0157 VFP fmrx and fmxr instructions. The opcode table contains %&lt;bitfield&gt;x, but 
0158 this was not implemented by print_insn_coprocessor.
0159 
0160 Tested with cross to arm-none-eabi.
0161 Applied to head.
0162 
0163 Paul
0164 
0165 2007-03-24  Paul Brook  &lt;paul&lt; at &gt;codesourcery.com&gt;
0166 
0167 opcodes/
0168 * arm-dis.c (coprocessor_opcodes): Remove superfluous 0x.
0169 (print_insn_coprocessor): Handle %&lt;bitfield&gt;x.
0170 </description>
0171     <dc:creator>Paul Brook</dc:creator>
0172     <dc:date>2007-03-24T02:50:44</dc:date>
0173   </item>
0174   <item rdf:about="http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.comp.gnu.binutils/32036">
0175     <title>ARM SRS bugs</title>
0176     <link>http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.comp.gnu.binutils/32036</link>
0177     <description>The attached patch fixes some issues with the ARM/Thumb SRS instruction.
0178 Gas was incorrectly encoding the Thumb variants of these instructions.
0179 In addition, Arm have changes the assembly syntax for these instructions to 
0180 include an explicit base registers. Currently the only legal base register is 
0181 r13 (aka sp). The old syntax is still accepted.
0182 
0183 An optional first argument requires a tweak to parse_operands. When the first 
0184 operand is absent we don't have a comma to skip over when parsing 
0185 the "second" operand.
0186 
0187 Tested on arm-none-eabi.
0188 Applied to head.
0189 
0190 Paul
0191 
0192 2007-03-24  Paul Brook  &lt;paul&lt; at &gt;codesourcery.com&gt;
0193 Mark Shinwell  &lt;shinwell&lt; at &gt;codesourcery.com&gt;
0194 
0195 gas/
0196 * config/tc-arm.c (operand_parse_code): Add OP_oRRw.
0197 (parse_operands): Don't expect comma if first operand missing.
0198 Handle OP_oRRw.
0199 (do_srs): Encode register number, checking it is r13.  Update comment.
0200 (insns): Update SRS entries to take a register.
0201 
0202 gas/testsuite/
0203 * gas/arm/archv6.s: Add new SRS tests.
0204 * gas/arm/archv6.d: Update expected output.</description>
0205     <dc:creator>Paul Brook</dc:creator>
0206     <dc:date>2007-03-24T01:20:01</dc:date>
0207   </item>
0208   <item rdf:about="http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.comp.gnu.binutils/32026">
0209     <title>Move position of &lt; at &gt;contents</title>
0210     <link>http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.comp.gnu.binutils/32026</link>
0211     <description>At the moment, the printed versions of most manuals (all except
0212 libiberty) explicitly put the table of contents at the very end of
0213 the document, after the index and (where used) the page containing
0214 typesetting information.  This is at odds with most (although admittedly
0215 not all) manuals I've seen, and is also at odds with the gcc manual.
0216 It seems more common for the contents to go after the title page and
0217 for the index to go at the end.
0218 
0219 This patch puts the contents after the title page instead.
0220 Tested with "make info", "make html" and "make pdf".  OK to install?
0221 
0222 Richard
0223 
0224 
0225 bfd/
0226 200x-xx-xx  Richard Sandiford  &lt;richard&lt; at &gt;codesourcery.com&gt;
0227     Phil Edwards  &lt;phil&lt; at &gt;codesourcery.com&gt;
0228 
0229 * doc/bfd.texinfo: Put the contents after the title page rather
0230 than at the end of the document.
0231 
0232 binutils/
0233 200x-xx-xx  Richard Sandiford  &lt;richard&lt; at &gt;codesourcery.com&gt;
0234     Phil Edwards  &lt;phil&lt; at &gt;codesourcery.com&gt;
0235 
0236 * doc/binutils.texi: Put the contents after the title page rather
0237 than at the end of the document.
0238 
0239 gas/
0240 200x-xx-xx  Rich</description>
0241     <dc:creator>Richard Sandiford</dc:creator>
0242     <dc:date>2007-03-23T16:28:09</dc:date>
0243   </item>
0244   <item rdf:about="http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.comp.gnu.binutils/32023">
0245     <title>Undocumented change to readelf?</title>
0246     <link>http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.comp.gnu.binutils/32023</link>
0247     <description>Hi Nick,
0248 
0249 You checked in this change:
0250 
0251 http://sourceware.org/ml/binutils-cvs/2007-03/msg00085.html
0252 
0253 to use pc-relative relocation instead of an absolute relocation for
0254 x86_64-pc-mingw32 target. But you also changed readelf.c, which
0255 wasn't mentioned in ChangeLog. What is that change for?
0256 
0257 Thanks.
0258 
0259 
0260 H.J.
0261 
0262 </description>
0263     <dc:creator>H. J. Lu</dc:creator>
0264     <dc:date>2007-03-23T15:53:39</dc:date>
0265   </item>
0266   <item rdf:about="http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.comp.gnu.binutils/32019">
0267     <title>[patch RFA] Do nothing in debug_apply_rela_addends for SH</title>
0268     <link>http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.comp.gnu.binutils/32019</link>
0269     <description>Hi,
0270 
0271 PR gas/3811 was caught with the cfi-common-6 test and turned
0272 out an SH specific problem of readelf.
0273 readelf loads the .eh_frame section and fixes the contents
0274 according to rela addends with debug_apply_rela_addends when
0275 the target uses RELA.  Although SH uses RELA relocations,
0276 it doesn't use their addend fields and uses in place values.
0277 This makes debug_apply_rela_addends confused.  The attached
0278 patch is to fix it.  Tested on i686-pc-linux-gnu and sh4-
0279 unknown-linux-gnu with no new regressions.
0280 
0281 Regards,
0282 kaz
0283 --
0284 2007-03-23  Kaz Kojima  &lt;kkojima&lt; at &gt;rr.iij4u.or.jp&gt;
0285 
0286 PR gas/3811
0287 * readelf.c (debug_apply_rela_addends): Do nothing for SH.
0288 
0289 diff -uprN ORIG/src/binutils/readelf.c LOCAL/src/binutils/readelf.c
0290 --- ORIG/src/binutils/readelf.c2007-03-22 11:58:55.000000000 +0900
0291 +++ LOCAL/src/binutils/readelf.c2007-03-23 08:07:03.000000000 +0900
0292 &lt; at &gt;&lt; at &gt; -7803,6 +7803,10 &lt; at &gt;&lt; at &gt; debug_apply_rela_addends (void *file,
0293    if (!is_relocatable)
0294      return 1;
0295  
0296 +  /* SH uses RELA but uses in place value instead of the addend fiel</description>
0297     <dc:creator>Kaz Kojima</dc:creator>
0298     <dc:date>2007-03-23T12:45:12</dc:date>
0299   </item>
0300   <item rdf:about="http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.comp.gnu.binutils/32017">
0301     <title>Overlay load address symbols</title>
0302     <link>http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.comp.gnu.binutils/32017</link>
0303     <description>__load_start_* and __load_stop_* symbols marking overlay load
0304 addresses are currently defined whether or not the symbols are used.
0305 I reckon we should reduce useless symbol table clutter and make them
0306 PROVIDE()'d.  Does anyone object to the following?
0307 
0308 ld/
0309 * ldlang.c (lang_insert_orphan): Provide start/stop loadaddr syms
0310 rather than defining unconditionally.
0311 (lang_leave_overlay_section): Likewise.
0312 * ld.texinfo (Overlay Description): Update description and examples
0313 for start/stop syms.
0314 ld/testsuite/
0315 * ld-elf/overlay.d: -u symbols we want to see in the output.
0316 
0317 Index: ld/ld.texinfo
0318 ===================================================================
0319 RCS file: /cvs/src/src/ld/ld.texinfo,v
0320 retrieving revision 1.189
0321 diff -u -p -r1.189 ld.texinfo
0322 --- ld/ld.texinfo22 Mar 2007 21:18:34 -00001.189
0323 +++ ld/ld.texinfo23 Mar 2007 06:24:48 -0000
0324 &lt; at &gt;&lt; at &gt; -4030,7 +4030,7 &lt; at &gt;&lt; at &gt; section to refer directly to another.  &lt; at &gt;
0325  NOCROSSREFS}.
0326  
0327  For each section within the &lt; at &gt;code{OVERLAY}, the linker automatically
0328 -defines two symbols. </description>
0329     <dc:creator>Alan Modra</dc:creator>
0330     <dc:date>2007-03-23T10:53:22</dc:date>
0331   </item>
0332   <item rdf:about="http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.comp.gnu.binutils/32012">
0333     <title>Move bugurl and pkgversion support to config/acx.m4</title>
0334     <link>http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.comp.gnu.binutils/32012</link>
0335     <description>The --with-bugurl and --with-pkgversion support now has all the features I 
0336 want: it includes the text in both --version and --help output, following 
0337 the GNU Coding Standards, and in the user manuals.  This patch moves the 
0338 configure support, hopefully now more or less stable, to macros in 
0339 config/acx.m4 that may then in future be used by GCC.  OK to commit?
0340 
0341 bfd:
0342 2007-03-23  Joseph Myers  &lt;joseph&lt; at &gt;codesourcery.com&gt;
0343 
0344 * configure.in: Use ACX_PKGVERSION and ACX_BUGURL.
0345 
0346 config:
0347 2007-03-23  Joseph Myers  &lt;joseph&lt; at &gt;codesourcery.com&gt;
0348 
0349 * acx.m4 (ACX_PKGVERSION, ACX_BUGURL): Define.
0350 
0351 Index: bfd/configure.in
0352 ===================================================================
0353 RCS file: /cvs/src/src/bfd/configure.in,v
0354 retrieving revision 1.225
0355 diff -u -r1.225 configure.in
0356 --- bfd/configure.in22 Mar 2007 21:18:29 -00001.225
0357 +++ bfd/configure.in23 Mar 2007 01:46:43 -0000
0358 &lt; at &gt;&lt; at &gt; -63,37 +63,8 &lt; at &gt;&lt; at &gt;
0359      [Define if we should default to creating read-only plt entries])
0360  fi
0361  
0362 -# Package version.  For an official FSF release, it </description>
0363     <dc:creator>Joseph S. Myers</dc:creator>
0364     <dc:date>2007-03-23T01:53:45</dc:date>
0365   </item>
0366   <item rdf:about="http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.comp.gnu.binutils/32010">
0367     <title>[pacth committed] SH: Update a few ld tests in ld-sh</title>
0368     <link>http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.comp.gnu.binutils/32010</link>
0369     <description>Hi,
0370 
0371 ld-sh/ld-r-1 and ld-sh/shared-1 need tweaks because readelf changes
0372 the format slightly when dumping the contents of section and warns
0373 if the section has relocations which have not been applied yet.
0374 Tested on sh-elf and sh4-unknown-linux-gnu.  Committed.
0375 
0376 Regards,
0377 kaz
0378 --
0379 2007-03-23  Kaz Kojima  &lt;kkojima&lt; at &gt;rr.iij4u.or.jp&gt;
0380 
0381 * ld-sh/ld-r-1.d: Update.
0382 * ld-sh/shared-1.d: Likewise.
0383 
0384 diff -uprN ORIG/src/ld/testsuite/ld-sh/ld-r-1.d LOCAL/src/ld/testsuite/ld-sh/ld-r-1.d
0385 --- ORIG/src/ld/testsuite/ld-sh/ld-r-1.d2002-10-15 03:45:02.000000000 +0900
0386 +++ LOCAL/src/ld/testsuite/ld-sh/ld-r-1.d2007-03-22 14:37:57.000000000 +0900
0387 &lt; at &gt;&lt; at &gt; -17,7 +17,8 &lt; at &gt;&lt; at &gt; Relocation section '\.rela\.text' at off
0388  00000008  00000101 R_SH_DIR32 +00000000 +\.text +\+ 0
0389  
0390  Hex dump of section '\.text':
0391 -  0x00000000          0000000c 00090009 00090009 .*
0392 +.*
0393 +  0x00000000 09000900 09000900 0c000000 .*
0394  
0395  Hex dump of section '\.rela\.text':
0396 -  0x00000000          00000000 00000101 00000008 .*
0397 +  0x00000000 08000000 01010000 00000000 .*
0398 diff -uprN </description>
0399     <dc:creator>Kaz Kojima</dc:creator>
0400     <dc:date>2007-03-23T00:03:05</dc:date>
0401   </item>
0402   <item rdf:about="http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.comp.gnu.binutils/32009">
0403     <title>spu ld testsuite tweak</title>
0404     <link>http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.comp.gnu.binutils/32009</link>
0405     <description>ld/testsuite/ChangeLog
0406 * ld-elf/elf.exp: Add "--local-store 0:0" to LDFLAGS for spu.
0407 
0408 Index: ld/testsuite/ld-elf/elf.exp
0409 ===================================================================
0410 RCS file: /cvs/src/src/ld/testsuite/ld-elf/elf.exp,v
0411 retrieving revision 1.8
0412 diff -u -p -r1.8 elf.exp
0413 --- ld/testsuite/ld-elf/elf.exp15 Nov 2005 08:32:02 -00001.8
0414 +++ ld/testsuite/ld-elf/elf.exp22 Mar 2007 22:04:18 -0000
0415 &lt; at &gt;&lt; at &gt; -1,5 +1,5 &lt; at &gt;&lt; at &gt;
0416  # Expect script for various ELF tests.
0417 -#   Copyright 2002, 2003 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
0418 +#   Copyright 2002, 2003, 2005, 2007 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
0419  #
0420  # This file is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify
0421  # it under the terms of the GNU General Public License as published by
0422 &lt; at &gt;&lt; at &gt; -22,6 +22,10 &lt; at &gt;&lt; at &gt; if ![is_elf_format] {
0423      return
0424  }
0425  
0426 +if { [istarget spu*-*-*] } {
0427 +    set LDFLAGS "$LDFLAGS --local-store 0:0"
0428 +}
0429 +
0430  set test_list [lsort [glob -nocomplain $srcdir/$subdir/*.d]]
0431  foreach t $test_list {
0432      # We need to strip the ".d", but can leave the dirnam</description>
0433     <dc:creator>Alan Modra</dc:creator>
0434     <dc:date>2007-03-22T23:46:55</dc:date>
0435   </item>
0436   <item rdf:about="http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.comp.gnu.binutils/32006">
0437     <title>Patch to update libtool in GCC and binutils trees</title>
0438     <link>http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.comp.gnu.binutils/32006</link>
0439     <description>Here is a patch to update the libtool in the GCC and src trees to the
0440 ToT libtool.  I did not include the actual new libtool in this patch but
0441 if you pick up the latest snapshot (anything after March 19th) it should
0442 work.  I can send the libtool I used as a patch if people want me to.  I
0443 left it out of this patch in order to make it simpler to see what I did.
0444 
0445 I have tested this on one platform only so far so I think it needs more
0446 testing before we do anything further.
0447 
0448 Here is what I did:
0449 
0450 In GCC and Src trees I updated libtool by removing ltconfig, ltcf-c.sh,
0451 ltcf-cxx.sh, and ltcf-gcj.sh; updating ltmain.sh and libtool.m4; and
0452 adding ltsugar.m4, ltversion.m4, and ltoptions.m4.
0453 
0454 In the Src tree; in bfd, binutils, gas, gprof, and rda I added some
0455 includes and some macro calls and reordered a few things.  In these
0456 directories plus in ld, opcodes, and newlib I regenerated everthing by
0457 running "aclocal;automake -cygnus;autoconf".  Except in rda where
0458 -cygnus was not used.
0459 
0460 In the GCC tree I updated Makfile.am i</description>
0461     <dc:creator>Steve Ellcey</dc:creator>
0462     <dc:date>2007-03-22T21:27:01</dc:date>
0463   </item>
0464   <item rdf:about="http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.comp.gnu.binutils/32002">
0465     <title>Questions regarding address relaxation on IA-64</title>
0466     <link>http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.comp.gnu.binutils/32002</link>
0467     <description>Hi,
0468 
0469 Recently, I ran into a problem with compiler-linker interaction when  
0470 analyzing a code generation regression of the new instruction scheduler  
0471 for GCC that we develop.
0472 
0473 It seems that on IA64 addresses of global variables are loaded with two  
0474 instructions: "addl rXX = r1, &lt;offset&gt;" and "ld8 rXX = [rXX]", with the  
0475 latter being later changed to "nop" by the linker. This causes the  
0476 following questions:
0477 
0478   * Is the purpose of the "ld8" instruction to load the correct offset if  
0479 it does not fit into "addl" immediate operand?
0480 
0481   * Is it possible to use "movl rXX = &lt;offset&gt;" (move long immediate, in  
0482 MLX bundle) + "addl rXX = r1, rXX" for the same purpose?
0483 
0484   * Is it possible to tell compiler and linker that offsets will be small  
0485 enough so that only "addl rXX = r1, &lt;offset&gt;" will be needed (and if it is  
0486 not possbile, why)?
0487 
0488 I have noticed that with -mno-pic GCC generates "movl rXX = &lt;address&gt;"  
0489 (MLX bundle). This causes a couple of questions, too:
0490 
0491    * Is it possible to use "mov rXX = &lt;offset-or-</description>
0492     <dc:creator>Alexander Monakov</dc:creator>
0493     <dc:date>2007-03-22T17:21:26</dc:date>
0494   </item>
0495   <item rdf:about="http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.comp.gnu.binutils/31993">
0496     <title>CBZ to the next instruction on ARM</title>
0497     <link>http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.comp.gnu.binutils/31993</link>
0498     <description>Here's an ugly one I've had knocking around for a while.
0499 
0500 It's actually illegal for a CBZ instruction on ARM to jump to the
0501 next instruction.  This can cause problems because gcc's
0502 branch length adjustment algorithm (as far as I can tell) does not
0503 cope with branch instructions that actually have a _minimum_ range
0504 as this one does.  In certain very unusual circumstances it is possible
0505 for the compiler to emit code that has a CBZ to the next instruction,
0506 which currently causes a failure.
0507 
0508 I propose the application of the attached patch that rewrites
0509 such bogus CBZ instructions to no-ops.  This isn't particularly
0510 elegant, but does make this robust.  OK?
0511 
0512 Mark
0513 
0514 --
0515 
0516 
0517 2007-03-23  Mark Shinwell  &lt;shinwell&lt; at &gt;codesourcery.com&gt;
0518 
0519 gas/
0520 * config/tc-arm.c (md_apply_fix): Turn CZB instructions that
0521 attempt to jump to the next instruction into NOPs.
0522 
0523 
0524 Index: gas/config/tc-arm.c
0525 ===================================================================
0526 RCS file: /cvs/src/src/gas/config/tc-arm.c,v
0527 retrieving revision 1.315
0528 diff -U3</description>
0529     <dc:creator>Mark Shinwell</dc:creator>
0530     <dc:date>2007-03-22T15:43:14</dc:date>
0531   </item>
0532   <item rdf:about="http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.comp.gnu.binutils/31970">
0533     <title>Binutils 2.18 prep</title>
0534     <link>http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.comp.gnu.binutils/31970</link>
0535     <description>Hello all,
0536 
0537 According to the informal schedule I've been following, binutils 2.18
0538 should be coming up soon.  I have a collection of flagged messages to
0539 go back to before I let another release out the door, but I definitely
0540 don't claim to track everything.  If you have any recently committed
0541 projects (or likely to be committed soon) that should have a little
0542 more time to settle, please let me know.
0543 
0544 I expect to create the branch within a couple of weeks.  I'd like to
0545 keep the branch-to-release interval fairly short; I've been using
0546 better revision control systems than CVS lately, and they've left me
0547 very bitter about having to merge patches to a CVS branch.  Volunteers
0548 to find a workable way to use SVN for src instead are highly welcomed
0549 as far as I'm concerned.
0550 
0551 </description>
0552     <dc:creator>Daniel Jacobowitz</dc:creator>
0553     <dc:date>2007-03-22T02:48:38</dc:date>
0554   </item>
0555   <item rdf:about="http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.comp.gnu.binutils/31968">
0556     <title>PATCH: Check 0x90 instead of xchg for xchg %rax,%rax</title>
0557     <link>http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.comp.gnu.binutils/31968</link>
0558     <description>This patch optimizes processs of xchg %rax,%rax by checking 0x90
0559 instead of xchg.
0560 
0561 
0562 H.J.
0563 ----
0564 2003-03-21  H.J. Lu  &lt;hongjiu.lu&lt; at &gt;intel.com&gt;
0565 
0566 * config/tc-i386.c (process_suffix): Check 0x90 instead of
0567 xchg for xchg %rax,%rax.
0568 
0569 --- gas/config/tc-i386.c.opt2007-03-21 14:24:12.000000000 -0700
0570 +++ gas/config/tc-i386.c2007-03-21 17:20:57.000000000 -0700
0571 &lt; at &gt;&lt; at &gt; -2983,7 +2983,7 &lt; at &gt;&lt; at &gt; process_suffix (void)
0572    if (i.operands != 2
0573        || i.types [0] != (Acc | Reg64)
0574        || i.types [1] != (Acc | Reg64)
0575 -      || strcmp (i.tm.name, "xchg") != 0)
0576 +      || i.tm.base_opcode != 0x90)
0577    i.rex |= REX_W;
0578  }
0579  
0580 
0581 </description>
0582     <dc:creator>H. J. Lu</dc:creator>
0583     <dc:date>2007-03-22T00:26:23</dc:date>
0584   </item>
0585   <item rdf:about="http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.comp.gnu.binutils/31957">
0586     <title>Why does x86 binutils use REX_MODE64/REX_EXTX/REX_EXTY/REX_EXTZ?</title>
0587     <link>http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.comp.gnu.binutils/31957</link>
0588     <description>The hardware spec uses REX.W/REX.R/REX.X/REX.B. But x86 binutils uses
0589 REX_MODE64/REX_EXTX/REX_EXTY/REX_EXTZ. I have to do a translation
0590 when I read the code. I suggest we repleace them with
0591 REX_W/REX_R/REX_X/REX_B. Dissassembler will print rexWRXB instead of
0592 rex64XYZ.
0593 
0594 
0595 H.J.
0596 
0597 </description>
0598     <dc:creator>H. J. Lu</dc:creator>
0599     <dc:date>2007-03-21T19:38:38</dc:date>
0600   </item>
0601   <item rdf:about="http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.comp.gnu.binutils/31955">
0602     <title>[toplevel] Fix quoting of TOPLEVEL_CONFIGURE_ARGUMENTS</title>
0603     <link>http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.comp.gnu.binutils/31955</link>
0604     <description>The top-level configure stores a copy of the original arguments
0605 in TOPLEVEL_CONFIGURE_ARGUMENTS, which is then used for things
0606 like gcc --verbose.  AIUI, you're supposed to be able to cut-&amp;-paste
0607 the gcc --verbose and use them as configure arguments in another build.
0608 
0609 The code seems to be based on the autoconf 2.5x ac_configure_args code,
0610 but I noticed two problems: (1) the glob isn't m4-quoted, so ends up
0611 in configure without the square brackets; and (2) unlike the autoconf
0612 version, it doesn't treat single quotes a special character.
0613 
0614 Fixed with the patch below.  Bootstrapped &amp; regression-tested
0615 on x86_64-linux-gnu.  OK to install?
0616 
0617 (I've included the auto-generated output too to show the effect
0618 of the m4 quoting fix.)
0619 
0620 Richard
0621 
0622 
0623 * configure.ac (TOPLEVEL_CONFIGURE_ARGUMENTS): Fix m4 quoting
0624 of glob.  Quote arguments with single quotes too.
0625 * configure: Regenerate.
0626 
0627 Index: configure.ac
0628 ===================================================================
0629 --- configure.ac(revision 123107)
0630 +++ configure.ac(</description>
0631     <dc:creator>Richard Sandiford</dc:creator>
0632     <dc:date>2007-03-21T19:26:06</dc:date>
0633   </item>
0634   <item rdf:about="http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.comp.gnu.binutils/31954">
0635     <title>PATCH: PR binutils/4218: objdump on AMD64 fails to decode prefixed 0x90 opcode properly.</title>
0636     <link>http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.comp.gnu.binutils/31954</link>
0637     <description>The assembler doesn't use the shorter 0x90 opcode for xchg in 64bit
0638 mode and the disassembler fails to proper decode the REX byte before
0639 0x90. Also nop (0f 1f) takes both register and memory operand.
0640 
0641 This patch fixes those.
0642 
0643 H.J.
0644 -----
0645 gas/
0646 
0647 2003-03-21  H.J. Lu  &lt;hongjiu.lu&lt; at &gt;intel.com&gt;
0648 
0649 PR binutils/4218
0650 * config/tc-i386.c (match_template): Properly handle 64bit mode
0651 "xchg %eax, %eax".
0652 
0653 gas/testsuite/
0654 
0655 2003-03-21  H.J. Lu  &lt;hongjiu.lu&lt; at &gt;intel.com&gt;
0656 
0657 PR binutils/4218
0658 * gas/i386/nops.s: Add testcases for nop r/m.
0659 * gas/i386/x86-64-nops.s: Likewise.
0660 
0661 * gas/i386/x86-64-opcode.s: Add testcases for xchg with %ax,
0662 %eax and %rax.
0663 
0664 * gas/i386/nops.d: Updated.
0665 * gas/i386/x86-64-nops.d: Likewise.
0666 * gas/i386/x86-64-opcode.d: Likewise.
0667 
0668 opcodes/
0669 
0670 2003-03-21  H.J. Lu  &lt;hongjiu.lu&lt; at &gt;intel.com&gt;
0671 
0672 PR binutils/4218
0673 * i386-dis.c (PREGRP38): New.
0674 (dis386): Use PREGRP38 for 0x90.
0675 (prefix_user_table): Add PREGRP38.
0676 (print_insn): Set uses_REPZ_prefix to 1 for pause.
0677 (NOP_Fixup1): Properly handle REX bits.
0678 (NOP_Fixup2): </description>
0679     <dc:creator>H. J. Lu</dc:creator>
0680     <dc:date>2007-03-21T19:15:44</dc:date>
0681   </item>
0682   <item rdf:about="http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.comp.gnu.binutils/31938">
0683     <title>objdump error, says file format not recognized.</title>
0684     <link>http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.comp.gnu.binutils/31938</link>
0685     <description>Hi,
0686 
0687 My target is an ia64 architecture and the host is i686 gnu linux ...
0688 the objdump is not recognzing the file format i.e. ELF64 ..
0689  I am using binutils-2.17.
0690 Where all should the changes be made to make atleast objdump work ..
0691 
0692 
0693 
0694 Thanks ..
0695 
0696 </description>
0697     <dc:creator>sneha ved</dc:creator>
0698     <dc:date>2007-03-21T10:41:52</dc:date>
0699   </item>
0700   <textinput about="http://search.gmane.org/?group=$group=gmane.comp.gnu.binutils">
0701     <title>Search Engine</title>
0702     <description>Search the mailing list at Gmane</description>
0703     <name>query</name>
0704     <link>http://search.gmane.org/?group=$group=gmane.comp.gnu.binutils</link>
0705   </textinput>
0706 </rdf:RDF>