gcc-as-needed.diff patch broke mpx support in GCC
Affects | Status | Importance | Assigned to | Milestone | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
gcc |
Fix Released
|
Medium
|
|||
binutils (Ubuntu) |
Fix Released
|
Medium
|
Unassigned | ||
Xenial |
Fix Released
|
Medium
|
Unassigned | ||
Yakkety |
Won't Fix
|
Undecided
|
Unassigned | ||
gcc-5 (Ubuntu) |
Fix Released
|
Medium
|
Matthias Klose | ||
Xenial |
Fix Released
|
Medium
|
Unassigned | ||
Yakkety |
Won't Fix
|
Undecided
|
Unassigned | ||
gcc-6 (Ubuntu) |
Fix Released
|
Medium
|
Unassigned | ||
Yakkety |
Won't Fix
|
Undecided
|
Unassigned |
Bug Description
[SRU Justification]
gcc-5 from Ubuntu is configured with MPX support, but it is broken due
to always-added linker option "-as-needed".
[Test case]
1. Pass -mmpx to gcc when building an arbitrary project on x86.
2. Verify with ldd that the resulting executable is not linked against libmpx.so because the -as-needed flag has discarded the mpx library from being linked in.
3. Install binutils and gcc-5 from -proposed.
4. Rebuild the target, again with -mmpx.
5. Verify with ldd that the new executable is linked against libmpx.so.
6. Verify that there are no regressions in the binutils testsuite on any architectures, by manually checking the results in the build log.
[Regression potential]
This binutils patch implements new --push-state / --pop-state options which will not be used in the common case, only when -mmpx is passed. When these flags are not in use, which is the default, it should have no effect on the behavior of the toolchain, so risk of regression is minimal.
Here is the GCC upstream bug & fix
https:/
https:/
Would it be possible to backport this fix to Ubuntu gcc-5 build?
affects: | ubuntu → gcc-5 (Ubuntu) |
tags: | added: yakkety |
tags: | added: rls-y-incoming |
Changed in gcc-5 (Ubuntu): | |
assignee: | nobody → Matthias Klose (doko) |
no longer affects: | gcc-6 (Ubuntu Xenial) |
description: | updated |
Changed in gcc-5 (Ubuntu): | |
importance: | Undecided → Medium |
Changed in binutils (Ubuntu Xenial): | |
importance: | Undecided → Medium |
Changed in gcc-6 (Ubuntu): | |
importance: | Undecided → Medium |
Changed in gcc-5 (Ubuntu Xenial): | |
importance: | Undecided → Medium |
Changed in binutils (Ubuntu): | |
importance: | Undecided → Medium |
Changed in binutils (Ubuntu Yakkety): | |
status: | Fix Committed → Won't Fix |
Changed in gcc-5 (Ubuntu Yakkety): | |
status: | New → Won't Fix |
Changed in gcc-6 (Ubuntu Yakkety): | |
status: | New → Won't Fix |
Changed in gcc: | |
importance: | Unknown → Medium |
status: | Unknown → Fix Released |
Thank you for taking the time to report this bug and helping to make Ubuntu better. It seems that your bug report is not filed about a specific source package though, rather it is just filed against Ubuntu in general. It is important that bug reports be filed about source packages so that people interested in the package can find the bugs about it. You can find some hints about determining what package your bug might be about at https:/ /wiki.ubuntu. com/Bugs/ FindRightPackag e. You might also ask for help in the #ubuntu-bugs irc channel on Freenode.
To change the source package that this bug is filed about visit https:/ /bugs.launchpad .net/ubuntu/ +bug/1623418/ +editstatus and add the package name in the text box next to the word Package.
[This is an automated message. I apologize if it reached you inappropriately; please just reply to this message indicating so.]