From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Mark Mitchell To: ian@zembu.com Cc: binutils@sourceware.cygnus.com Subject: Re: Your change to ldlang.c Date: Thu, 01 Jul 1999 20:25:00 -0000 Message-id: <19990701203004Q.mitchell@codesourcery.com> References: <19990701175806N.mitchell@codesourcery.com> <19990702024311.26848.qmail@daffy.airs.com> <19990702024311.26848.qmail@daffy.airs.com> X-SW-Source: 1999-q3/msg00003.html >>>>> "Ian" == Ian Lance Taylor writes: Ian> I thought it was discussed on the list a bit, but I can't Ian> find the messages, so it must have been somewhere else. Ian> Richard, do you remember? I vaguely remember you mentioning the patch, but I don't recall the discussion. Ian> My main concern was that it would mess up relocations. If an Ian> input section disappears, relocations against symbols in that Ian> section need to be adjusted to use different symbols, and Ian> relocations for that section need to disappear. I doubt the Ian> backends do either of these correctly. I see. Of course, in this case, there are no relocations against the section. I guess I don't see why your solution is really any better. On the one hand, we may have bogus relocations. On the other, we've violated the SEC_LINK_ONCE semantics, especially for fixed-sized sections like .reginfo. I guess I'm thinking we should undo your change, and then attack the problem of making the back-ends handle the relocations correctly. That should not be *that* hard. Ian> We could go back to letting the emultempl file handle the Ian> .reginfo sections for MIPS files when doing a relocateable Ian> link, I suppose. Does anybody have a better suggestion? I don't know what you mean by this suggestion. I guess I'm too new to binutils-land. Could you elaborate on the emultempl file solution? -- Mark Mitchell mark@codesourcery.com CodeSourcery, LLC http://www.codesourcery.com