From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 9284 invoked by alias); 17 Aug 2006 17:04:40 -0000 Received: (qmail 9271 invoked by uid 22791); 17 Aug 2006 17:04:40 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from pool-71-248-179-229.bstnma.fios.verizon.net (HELO cgf.cx) (71.248.179.229) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Thu, 17 Aug 2006 17:04:36 +0000 Received: by cgf.cx (Postfix, from userid 201) id 4069813C042; Thu, 17 Aug 2006 13:04:34 -0400 (EDT) Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2006 05:12:00 -0000 From: Christopher Faylor To: Pedro Alves , binutils@sourceware.org Subject: Re: 2006-05-11 change to pe-dll.c breaks Windows DLLs Message-ID: <20060817170434.GA1954@trixie.casa.cgf.cx> Mail-Followup-To: Pedro Alves , binutils@sourceware.org References: <20060817050036.GA19122@trixie.casa.cgf.cx> <20060817050540.GA19240@trixie.casa.cgf.cx> <44E41898.50109@portugalmail.pt> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <44E41898.50109@portugalmail.pt> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.11 Mailing-List: contact binutils-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: binutils-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2006-08/txt/msg00202.txt.bz2 On Thu, Aug 17, 2006 at 08:19:52AM +0100, Pedro Alves wrote: >Christopher Faylor wrote: >>On Thu, Aug 17, 2006 at 01:00:36AM -0400, Christopher Faylor wrote: >>>The change following the "Huh?" below causes problems for x86 Windows >>>DLLs. >> >>Btw, the problem that I'm seeing is that Windows DLLs produced by ld can >>no longer be relocated -- which sort of makes sense given this change. >> >>[snip] >>>Pedro can you explain why this is needed? Should it possibly be >>>conditionalized only for your ARM target? >>> > >I can't say I understand it myself. It was part of some pending patches >I had that I found somewhere else when I started hacking binutils (as >explained on the mail where I posted that patch), for which I don't know >the author (I think it was Mamaich). >That part has been making me nervous too, and I have it removed in my >local tree for a while, in the hope I would see the reason for it. >I don't. >I am *very* sorry that it caused trouble. It's really no problem. I'm afraid that I will have to demand a refund, however. :-) >Proposed patch attached that reverts the offending parts. Please >review and commit. > >ld/Changelog > > 2006-08-17 Pedro Alves > > * pe-dll.c (autofilter_symbolprefixlist): Remove .idata$. > (generate_reloc): Revert to skipping sections without a > SEC_LOAD flag, and to not skipping .idata* sections. Reviewed and committed. Thanks for the quick response. cgf