Re: ar (binutils) segfaulting in Rawhide - known bug?

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Fri, 2020-07-24 at 22:29 +0100, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> Just upgraded a development machine to:
> 
> binutils-2.34.0-10.fc33.x86_64
> gcc-10.1.1-2.fc33.x86_64
> glibc-2.31.9000-21.fc33.x86_64
> 
> and a very simple C compile (non-LTO) is now segfaulting:
> 
> make[3]: Entering directory '/home/rjones/d/nbdkit/common/protocol'
> /bin/sh ../../libtool  --tag=CC   --mode=compile gcc -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -I../..    -Wall -Wshadow -Wvla -Werror -O0 -g -Wp,-U_FORTIFY_SOURCE  -MT libprotocol_la-protostrings.lo -MD -MP -MF .deps/libprotocol_la-protostrings.Tpo -c -o libprotocol_la-protostrings.lo `test -f 'protostrings.c' || echo './'`protostrings.c
> libtool: compile:  gcc -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -I../.. -Wall -Wshadow -Wvla -Werror -O0 -g -Wp,-U_FORTIFY_SOURCE -MT libprotocol_la-protostrings.lo -MD -MP -MF .deps/libprotocol_la-protostrings.Tpo -c protostrings.c  -fPIC -DPIC -o .libs/libprotocol_la-protostrings.o
> libtool: compile:  gcc -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -I../.. -Wall -Wshadow -Wvla -Werror -O0 -g -Wp,-U_FORTIFY_SOURCE -MT libprotocol_la-protostrings.lo -MD -MP -MF .deps/libprotocol_la-protostrings.Tpo -c protostrings.c -o libprotocol_la-protostrings.o >/dev/null 2>&1
> mv -f .deps/libprotocol_la-protostrings.Tpo .deps/libprotocol_la-protostrings.Plo
> /bin/sh ../../libtool  --tag=CC   --mode=link gcc -Wall -Wshadow -Wvla -Werror -O0 -g -Wp,-U_FORTIFY_SOURCE   -O0 -g -Wp,-U_FORTIFY_SOURCE  -o libprotocol.la  libprotocol_la-protostrings.lo   
> libtool: link: ar cru .libs/libprotocol.a .libs/libprotocol_la-protostrings.o 
> ../../libtool: line 1734: 2572327 Segmentation fault      (core dumped) ar cru .libs/libprotocol.a .libs/libprotocol_la-protostrings.o
> 
> Core was generated by `ar cru .libs/libprotocol.a .libs/libprotocol_la-protostrings.o'.
> Program terminated with signal SIGSEGV, Segmentation fault.
> #0  0x0000000000000000 in ?? ()
>  binutils-2.34.0-10.fc33.x86_64
> (gdb) bt
> Missing separate debuginfos, use: dnf debuginfo-install#0  0x0000000000000000 in ?? ()
> #1  0x00007f15bd3e03d0 in make_relative_prefix_1.part ()
>    from /lib64/libbfd-2.34.0.20200522.so
> #2  0x00007f15bd3d22db in bfd_plugin_object_p.lto_priv ()
>    from /lib64/libbfd-2.34.0.20200522.so
> #3  0x00007f15bd3401ce in bfd_check_format_matches ()
>    from /lib64/libbfd-2.34.0.20200522.so
> #4  0x00007f15bd340e7a in _bfd_write_archive_contents ()
>    from /lib64/libbfd-2.34.0.20200522.so
> #5  0x00007f15bd348b2a in bfd_close () from /lib64/libbfd-2.34.0.20200522.so
> #6  0x0000559ee83994b6 in write_archive ()
> #7  0x0000559ee8396ac3 in main ()
> 
> I can't find any BZ for this.  Any ideas what it could be?
Hmm, what's interesting here is that it's binutils-2.34, so it's not the update
that Nick was doing to do today.  I've seen a couple folks trip over this today
and just saw it in a couple of my builds.

I'll take a look.  I'm not much of a binutils hacker these days, but it's just
code.

jeff
> 
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx




[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Index of Archives]     [Fedora Announce]     [Fedora Users]     [Fedora Kernel]     [Fedora Testing]     [Fedora Formulas]     [Fedora PHP Devel]     [Kernel Development]     [Fedora Legacy]     [Fedora Maintainers]     [Fedora Desktop]     [PAM]     [Red Hat Development]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]

  Powered by Linux