Re: _bfd_dwarf2_find_nearest_line returns wrong filename

[Andreas Schwab <schwab at suse dot de>]

Daniel Jacobowitz <drow@mvista.com> writes:

> On Fri, Jan 03, 2003 at 03:39:40PM +0100, Andreas Schwab wrote:
> > Daniel Jacobowitz <drow@mvista.com> writes:
> > 
> > |> No regressions, but some pertinent facts:
> > |> 
> > |>  - Examine the ld.log with this patch applied.  Grep for BFD.  You'll
> > |>    find several assertion failures indicating that the DWARF-2 data
> > |>    is incorrect.  It's kind of sad that the testsuite doesn't notice any
> > |>    of these.
> > 
> > I have now tried it on ia64, and it is getting worse.  They are using
> > R_IA64_SECREL32LS relocations in .debug_info, which is causing
> > bfd_perform_relocation to return bfd_reloc_outofrange, and
> > bfd_generic_get_relocated_section_contents is aborting on that.

Actually it's not bfd_reloc_outofrange, but bfd_reloc_notsupported,
which is return by the ia64 reloc howto function if there is no output
bfd.

> Hmm.  This suggests that we need to save/restore output offsets, but
> that's just a guess.  Is that reproducible with cross tools?

Yes.  Just try "nm -l" on any object file.

Andreas.