segfault in bfd with large static binary

H. J. Lu hjl@lucon.org
Thu Feb 2 02:44:00 GMT 2006


On Wed, Feb 01, 2006 at 09:03:04PM -0500, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> On Wednesday 01 February 2006 06:47, Nick Clifton wrote:
> > > i was building statically the latest busybox binary on amd64 and when i
> > > went to strip it, strip segfaulted on me
> > >
> > > normally i use binutils 2.16.1, but i found 2.16.91.0.5 and the 060131
> > > snapshot bombed out the same way
> >
> > This is a bad assumption in assign_file_positions_for_segments() which
> > believes that it will always be passed a non-NULL link_info pointer.
> > Please could you try the attached patch which should fix the problem.
> 
> sorry for the delay ... with your patch, the 060131 snapshot no longer 
> segfaulted ... then again, using just H. J. Lu's patch and it no longer 
> segfaulted either :)

I don't think

http://sourceware.org/ml/binutils/2006-02/msg00016.html

is correct. That part of code is for linker only. strip/objcopy should
never reach it. The bug is elsewhere.


H.J.



More information about the Binutils mailing list