Comment 22 for bug 9465

Message-ID: <email address hidden>
Date: Thu, 25 Nov 2004 10:34:34 +0000
From: James Troup <email address hidden>
To: Andreas Schwab <email address hidden>
Cc: <email address hidden>, Matthias Klose <email address hidden>
Subject: Re: Bug#278388: [PR 18189] [3.3 regression] __fixunsdfdi problem on
 m68k

Andreas Schwab <email address hidden> writes:

> Matthias Klose <email address hidden> writes:
>
>> Andreas Schwab writes:
>>> This is a bug in binutils 2.15 that's already fixed in CVS HEAD.
>>
>> Andreas, please could you confirm this patch from upstream:
>>
>> http://sources.redhat.com/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/src/bfd/elf32-m68k.c.diff?cvsroot=src&r1=1.70&r2=1.71
>>
>
> This works for me:

Thanks. With this patch applied, the original bug report and some
testsuite failures are fixed but also some new ones are introduced -
are these anything to be concerned about?

| $ monica 2.15-2_m68k 2.15-5_m68k
| W: [ld-elfvsb/elfvsb.exp] REGRESSION (PASS -> FAIL): visibility (protected_undef_def) (non PIC, load offset)
| W: [ld-elfvsb/elfvsb.exp] REGRESSION (PASS -> FAIL): visibility (protected_weak) (non PIC, load offset)
| W: [ld-elfvsb/elfvsb.exp] REGRESSION (PASS -> FAIL): visibility (hidden_weak) (non PIC, load offset)
| I: [ld-shared/shared.exp] progression (FAIL -> PASS): shared (non PIC, load offset)
| I: [ld-elfvsb/elfvsb.exp] progression (FAIL -> PASS): visibility (normal) (PIC main, non PIC so)
| I: [ld-elfvsb/elfvsb.exp] progression (FAIL -> PASS): visibility (protected) (non PIC)
| I: [ld-elfvsb/elfvsb.exp] progression (FAIL -> PASS): visibility (normal) (non PIC)
| I: [ld-elfvsb/elfvsb.exp] progression (FAIL -> PASS): visibility (hidden_normal) (non PIC)
| 3 REGRESSIONS (0.99%).
| 5 progressions (1.64%).
| 304 tests: 296 pass (97.37%), 6 fail (1.97%), 2 xfail (0.66%) 0 untested (0.00%).
| $

--
James