From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 6141 invoked by alias); 28 Jun 2011 11:56:57 -0000 Received: (qmail 6132 invoked by uid 22791); 28 Jun 2011 11:56:57 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-1.8 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mel.act-europe.fr (HELO mel.act-europe.fr) (194.98.77.210) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Tue, 28 Jun 2011 11:56:41 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by filtered-smtp.eu.adacore.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9EE69CB01EA; Tue, 28 Jun 2011 13:56:39 +0200 (CEST) Received: from mel.act-europe.fr ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (smtp.eu.adacore.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id npL4pDzZMR8H; Tue, 28 Jun 2011 13:56:36 +0200 (CEST) Received: from ulanbator.act-europe.fr (ulanbator.act-europe.fr [10.10.1.67]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mel.act-europe.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7A428CB026C; Tue, 28 Jun 2011 13:56:36 +0200 (CEST) Subject: Re: PING Re: [RFA] Linker script extension SECTION_FLAGS Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1084) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii From: Tristan Gingold In-Reply-To: <4E09BCFF.2030208@redhat.com> Date: Tue, 28 Jun 2011 11:56:00 -0000 Cc: Catherine Moore , binutils@sourceware.org Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: References: <4DD41EB0.6040300@codesourcery.com> <4DDC37D2.3030700@codesourcery.com> <4DED4E64.6080507@codesourcery.com> <4DEE2390.2030309@redhat.com> <4E025F3A.6020003@codesourcery.com> <4E09BCFF.2030208@redhat.com> To: Nick Clifton X-IsSubscribed: yes 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: 2011-06/txt/msg00347.txt.bz2 On Jun 28, 2011, at 1:37 PM, Nick Clifton wrote: > Hi Catherine, >=20 >> Thanks for the patch review. I've developed a new patch that addresses >> the comments that both you and Tristan made regarding the original >> patch. I've now associated the INPUT_SECTION_FLAGS with the input >> section specifications instead of the output sectionas you and others >> suggested. I've tested arm-coff, mips-elf and ppc-elf. What do you >> think? Is this okay to commit? [...] > * You have not provided a patch for GOLD. I would like to keep the two = linkers in sync, at least as far as features go. Should we really require that ? I think that this is asking too much. The= re are some interesting features in gold (such as ICF) that aren't in ld; so they are already not in sync. Tristan.