"tail +140" no longer works.
Dave Korn
dave.korn.cygwin@googlemail.com
Wed Mar 4 11:54:00 GMT 2009
Nick Clifton wrote:
> Hi Dave,
>
>>> diff -u -p -r1.15 bootstrap.exp
>>> --- ld/testsuite/ld-bootstrap/bootstrap.exp 6 Jul 2007 14:09:42
>>> -0000 1.15
>>> +++ ld/testsuite/ld-bootstrap/bootstrap.exp 26 Feb 2009 04:44:23
>>> -0000
>>> @@ -152,8 +152,8 @@ foreach flags {"" "strip" "--static" "--
>>> # Although this works, a way to set the date would be better.
>>> # Removing or zeroing the date stamp in the binary produced by
>>> # the linker is not possible as it is required by the target
>>> OS.
>>> - exec tail +140 tmpdir/ld2 >tmpdir/ld2tail
>>> - exec tail +140 tmpdir/ld3 >tmpdir/ld3tail
>>> + exec tail -n +140 tmpdir/ld2 >tmpdir/ld2tail
>>> + exec tail -n +140 tmpdir/ld3 >tmpdir/ld3tail
>>> catch "exec cmp tmpdir/ld2tail tmpdir/ld3tail" exec_output
>>> exec rm tmpdir/ld2tail tmpdir/ld3tail
>>> } else {
>
>> It seems very odd to me that we are skipping 140 lines. tail -c +140
>> makes more sense, which is one past external_PEI_filehdr.f_timdat.
>> However, I think you will need to skip PEAOUTHDR.CheckSum as well, so
>> tail -c +220.
>
> I agree with Alan. Can you confirm whether "tail -c 220" works or not ?
> It might even be better to use "tail --bytes=220" for more clarity.
Hi guys: just to let you know I haven't given up on this, but since it's a
mere testsuite artifact, I've prioritised it low in the current series of
patches I'm generating. Please either ping me here in a week, or file a PR
and assign it to me, so I don't forget.
cheers,
DaveK
More information about the Binutils
mailing list