From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 18518 invoked by alias); 4 Apr 2005 00:24:41 -0000 Mailing-List: contact binutils-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: binutils-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 18443 invoked from network); 4 Apr 2005 00:24:34 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO gizmo01ps.bigpond.com) (144.140.71.11) by sourceware.org with SMTP; 4 Apr 2005 00:24:34 -0000 Received: (qmail 9584 invoked from network); 4 Apr 2005 00:24:32 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO psmam12.bigpond.com) (144.135.25.103) by gizmo01ps.bigpond.com with SMTP; 4 Apr 2005 00:24:32 -0000 Received: from cpe-144-136-221-26.sa.bigpond.net.au ([144.136.221.26]) by psmam12.bigpond.com(MAM REL_3_4_2a 234/2677421) with SMTP id 2677421; Mon, 04 Apr 2005 10:24:32 +1000 Received: by bubble.modra.org (Postfix, from userid 500) id 551B61A0A6E; Mon, 4 Apr 2005 09:54:32 +0930 Date: Mon, 04 Apr 2005 00:24:00 -0000 From: Alan Modra To: Mike Hearn Cc: binutils@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: What exactly does --enable-new-dtags do? Message-ID: <20050404002432.GC7121@bubble.modra.org> Mail-Followup-To: Mike Hearn , binutils@sources.redhat.com References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.4i X-SW-Source: 2005-04/txt/msg00052.txt.bz2 On Sun, Apr 03, 2005 at 06:49:29PM +0100, Mike Hearn wrote: > Hi, > > I would like to enable usage of DT_RUNPATH in my binaries, however the > only way to get this is with the --enable-new-dtags switch, the > exact effects of which are undocumented. The action of the switch itself is reasonably self-documenting. What's not so obvious is which of the new dtags ld generates, and which tags ld.so recognises. Documentation on the latter probably doesn't belong in ld.texinfo. Some info on the new tags can be found at http://docsun.cites.uiuc.edu/sun_docs/C/solaris_9/SUNWdev/LLM/p55.html > I don't mind DT_RUNPATH because support for this was added to glibc in > 1999, which is old enough that I think most of my users have upgraded by > now. But I have no idea what else it does, so I have no idea how recent a > system will be required by using this switch. > > It seems to me that a switch with such vague semantics is a bit dangerous. > Does anybody have a list of exactly what dyntags it enables? If not I'll > rummage about in the code and try to produce one. > > thanks -mike > -- Alan Modra IBM OzLabs - Linux Technology Centre