X-Recipient:	archive-cygwin AT delorie DOT com
DomainKey-Signature:	a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=sourceware.org; h=list-id
	:list-unsubscribe:list-subscribe:list-archive:list-post
	:list-help:sender:date:from:to:subject:message-id:reply-to
	:references:mime-version:content-type:in-reply-to; q=dns; s=
	default; b=Z9NkLlUAq9DecPBJQQ7MkunLwcwLYeLE1X2TvXtY+EtH8WBeuVD90
	gjVeZR7heWzYhfpnrMdjYtZb+jS5Fwmc6fKe50KwXJ8JgVO/pmCGBL/Xyu7XZZyE
	JT0FnLqIOP56mJ9LRkeHPP7pV1tX9geOx4rDayZLLyKfz07IhxMz8Y=
DKIM-Signature:	v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=sourceware.org; h=list-id
	:list-unsubscribe:list-subscribe:list-archive:list-post
	:list-help:sender:date:from:to:subject:message-id:reply-to
	:references:mime-version:content-type:in-reply-to; s=default;
	bh=tihqcOpM9SA08sAP0pEoH8Gnpow=; b=WkiJl1Al6uLMryi8A8gkdAbC4ZIR
	enOhG++tp7SnPMPlg3HdFXaT7q15R6O7AWumb2OA1/sY3nHzBD2DwSPZLc4+eHK2
	AQTafgY7q+bKnPhlvkT65Yk+dU1iJR6QD07bqea0GBkvetFDJi2XQ0FemVuLZQgj
	0EcxFE84gQr4uLE=
Mailing-List:	contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Id:	<cygwin.cygwin.com>
List-Subscribe:	<mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Archive:	<http://sourceware.org/ml/cygwin/>
List-Post:	<mailto:cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Help:	<mailto:cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com>, <http://sourceware.org/ml/#faqs>
Sender:	cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Delivered-To:	mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
X-Spam-SWARE-Status:	No, score=0.2 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_05,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,RCVD_IN_HOSTKARMA_YE,TW_BJ,TW_YG autolearn=no version=3.3.1
X-Mail-Handler:	Dyn Standard SMTP by Dyn
X-Report-Abuse-To:	abuse AT dyndns DOT com (see http://www.dyndns.com/services/sendlabs/outbound_abuse.html for abuse reporting information)
X-MHO-User:	U2FsdGVkX1+7CrYg/Y+iIwLph1+H8fzo
Date:	Mon, 15 Apr 2013 11:11:54 -0400
From:	Christopher Faylor <cgf-use-the-mailinglist-please AT cygwin DOT com>
To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Subject:	Re: Issue with binutils-2.23.1-1
Message-ID:	<20130415151154.GA7850@ednor.casa.cgf.cx>
Reply-To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
References:	<CAGHJv4eeEsAoZUz2LOov1q3OKe0ZR5rNvrotLjH5JGadisro+A AT mail DOT gmail DOT com> <CAGHJv4dbEZS52DWXey8+sgmyR1Mp+yK0Q1Dg4LBAx84KMiSiNw AT mail DOT gmail DOT com> <20130415132155 DOT GC24092 AT calimero DOT vinschen DOT de> <20130415134809 DOT GA4639 AT calimero DOT vinschen DOT de> <20130415143733 DOT GC5992 AT ednor DOT casa DOT cgf DOT cx> <20130415143954 DOT GB4639 AT calimero DOT vinschen DOT de>
MIME-Version:	1.0
In-Reply-To:	<20130415143954.GB4639@calimero.vinschen.de>
User-Agent:	Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14)

On Mon, Apr 15, 2013 at 04:39:54PM +0200, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
>On Apr 15 10:37, Christopher Faylor wrote:
>> On Mon, Apr 15, 2013 at 03:48:09PM +0200, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
>> >On Apr 15 15:21, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
>> >> On Apr 15 08:54, Chris Sutcliffe wrote:
>> >> > Hi All,
>> >> > 
>> >> > On 6 March 2013 08:40, Chris Sutcliffe wrote:
>> >> > > I noticed a problem after upgrading to the 2.23.1-1 release of
>> >> > > binutils that cygport was no longer generating debuginfo files.  After
>> >> > > digging in to it a little and following up on the cygwin-ports mailing
>> >> > > list, Yaakov determined that the objdump included in the 2.23.1
>> >> > > release of binutils does not handle the "-l" flag properly.  Reverting
>> >> > > to 2.22.51-2 solved the issue for me and Yaakov confirmed that the
>> >> > > issue does not exist in CVS HEAD either.
>> >> > 
>> >> > This issue has resurfaced in the 2.23.52.20130309 release of bintuils
>> >> > currently shipping with Cygwin.  My cygport based packages are no
>> >> > longer producing debuginfo packages.
>> >> 
>> >> Erm... 2.23.52-1 is a 64bit-only package.  I created all the debuginfo
>> >> packages with this version.  32 bit is at 2.23.51-1, and I'm pretty
>> >> sure I created the latest OpenSSH packages with that version, including
>> >> debuginfo.
>> >
>> >Oh, hmm.  The 2.23.51-1 package actually contains the 2.23.52.20130309
>> >binutils files, so never mind what I wrote.
>> 
>> Just to be clear: The current 32-bit version of binutils is 2.23.51-1.
>> It was released to address the problems with objdump introduced by a,
>> er, "illegal" upload by someone who was confused about binutils
>> maintainership.  There is no 32-bit version named 2.23.52.20130309
>> or 2.23.1-1.
>
>If you run `ld --version' on ld from the 2.23.51-1 package, it returns
>"GNU ld (GNU Binutils) 2.23.52.20130309"

Again, the version that was uploaded in March was to fix the problem
reported in this thread.  It's odd that it took a month for someone to
notice a problem if the problem is still there.

The original thread did not have an explanation of what the actual
problem with objdump was so I don't really have any way of investigating
it.  Yaakov, can you explain what you think the problem is?

cgf

--
Problem reports:       http://cygwin.com/problems.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple

- Raw text -