Re: copy_private_bfd_data in bfd/elf.c question

[Alan Modra <amodra@bigpond.net.au>]

On Sat, Jun 22, 2002 at 09:23:10PM +0200, Andreas Schwab wrote:
> Alan Modra <amodra@bigpond.net.au> writes:
> 
> |> On Fri, Jun 21, 2002 at 06:28:10PM +0200, Andreas Schwab wrote:
> |> > Steve Ellcey <sje@cup.hp.com> writes:
> |> > 
> |> > |> > How about posting before/after output of readelf -S -l, so we can
> |> > |> > have a clue as to what is going on.
> |> 
> |> Note to Steve: -l not -I !  I was curious as to whether the segment
> |> map changed.  If it didn't then no matter.
> |> 
> |> > |>   [ 4] .hash             HASH            04000620 000620 0000a4 00   A  0   0  8
> |> [snip]
> |> > |>   [ 4] .hash             HASH            04000620 00061c 0000a4 04   A  2   0  8
> |> > 
> |> > This seems to be the culprit.
> |> 
> |> sizeof_hash_entry == 4, so why does this matter?
> 
> But align == 8, and addr and off don't agree in the low 3 bits.

OK, it's different, but why does it matter?  Is there something that
says section alignment should affect file alignment?  I'm more worried
about Steve's report that objcopy resulted in a file that segv'd than
in a file that was different in what seems to me a fairly
insignificant way.

-- 
Alan Modra
IBM OzLabs - Linux Technology Centre