From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 8792 invoked by alias); 6 Aug 2007 12:19:28 -0000 Received: (qmail 8532 invoked by uid 22791); 6 Aug 2007 12:19:26 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from pool-71-248-179-24.bstnma.fios.verizon.net (HELO ednor.cgf.cx) (71.248.179.24) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Mon, 06 Aug 2007 12:19:24 +0000 Received: by ednor.cgf.cx (Postfix, from userid 201) id BE5D12B352; Mon, 6 Aug 2007 08:19:48 -0400 (EDT) Date: Mon, 06 Aug 2007 12:19:00 -0000 From: Christopher Faylor To: binutils@sourceware.org, Kai Tietz Subject: Re: PING: patch: PR-4877 testsuite fix for secreloc32 x86_64 Message-ID: <20070806121948.GB21221@ednor.casa.cgf.cx> Mail-Followup-To: binutils@sourceware.org, Kai Tietz References: <20070806113337.GB21109@ednor.casa.cgf.cx> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.15 (2007-04-06) Mailing-List: contact binutils-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: binutils-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2007-08/txt/msg00075.txt.bz2 On Mon, Aug 06, 2007 at 01:57:37PM +0200, Kai Tietz wrote: >Hi Christopher, > >> On Mon, Aug 06, 2007 at 09:34:55AM +0200, Kai Tietz wrote: >> >Hi, >> > >> >this patch will fix the problem on secreloc32 tests for x86_64-mingw32. > >> >For this target the ctor/dtor elements are 8 bytes long. This caused >the >> >FAIL. >> > >> >See bug-report: http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=4877 >> > >> >I tested this patch for x86_64-pc-mingw32 test-suite without any >> >regressions. >> > >> >ChangeLog for ld/testsuite: >> > >> >2007-08-02 Kai Tietz >> > >> > * ld-pe/pe.exp: special diff file for x86_64-mingw target. >> > * ld-pe/secrel_64.d: New. >> >> Is there some reason why this wouldn't work under a potential >> x86_64-cygwin target? I haven't been paying enough attention to this >> issue but it seems like whatever machinery works for mingw should also >> work for cygwin eventually. > >If there would be a crt1 for cygwin, I am certain that it would work >for x86_64-cygwin too. Cygwin does have similar crt* mechanisms to every other platform out there. I'm not asking you to implement anything here but could you maybe just keep cygwin in mind when making patches like this and not just default to "mingw"? cgf