Why does slurp_ia64_unwind_table complain unwind symbol type?

[David Mosberger]

Speaking of binutils bugs: I still have the following patch in my
tree:

Index: bfd/elfxx-ia64.c
===================================================================
RCS file: /cvs/src/src/bfd/elfxx-ia64.c,v
retrieving revision 1.141
diff -u -r1.141 elfxx-ia64.c
--- bfd/elfxx-ia64.c	10 Oct 2004 13:58:05 -0000	1.141
+++ bfd/elfxx-ia64.c	22 Oct 2004 08:51:40 -0000
@@ -4339,10 +4339,14 @@
 	case R_IA64_SECREL64MSB:
 	case R_IA64_SECREL64LSB:
 	  /* Make output-section relative.  */
+#if 0
 	  if (value > input_section->output_section->vma)
 	    value -= input_section->output_section->vma;
 	  else
 	    value = 0;
+#else
+	  value -= input_section->output_section->vma;
+#endif
 	  r = elfNN_ia64_install_value (hit_addr, value, r_type);
 	  break;
 

I'm 99% certain this is correct and I have never seen any problems
with it (and it certainly fixes section-relative relocs which result
in negative values), so I think it should go in.

However, last time we discussed this, Rich Henderson thought there
might be an obscure issue that required the old code and suggested to
rebuild a Linux distro with the patch applied and watch if anything
breaks.  Unfortunately, I'm not well set up to do this myself
(meaning: I have no clue how I'd go about rebuilding all of, say,
Debian... ;-).

Can somebody help with testing this?

	--david