From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 25172 invoked by alias); 27 Feb 2011 18:54:14 -0000 Received: (qmail 25164 invoked by uid 22791); 27 Feb 2011 18:54:14 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.3 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,SPF_HELO_PASS,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from smtp-out.google.com (HELO smtp-out.google.com) (216.239.44.51) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Sun, 27 Feb 2011 18:54:08 +0000 Received: from wpaz13.hot.corp.google.com (wpaz13.hot.corp.google.com [172.24.198.77]) by smtp-out.google.com with ESMTP id p1RIs6tL015424 for ; Sun, 27 Feb 2011 10:54:06 -0800 Received: from pwi4 (pwi4.prod.google.com [10.241.219.4]) by wpaz13.hot.corp.google.com with ESMTP id p1RIs4EG029645 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-SHA bits=128 verify=NOT) for ; Sun, 27 Feb 2011 10:54:05 -0800 Received: by pwi4 with SMTP id 4so860369pwi.11 for ; Sun, 27 Feb 2011 10:54:04 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.143.132.7 with SMTP id j7mr3644604wfn.13.1298832844349; Sun, 27 Feb 2011 10:54:04 -0800 (PST) Received: from coign.google.com ([216.239.45.130]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id m10sm4732802wfl.23.2011.02.27.10.54.02 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Sun, 27 Feb 2011 10:54:03 -0800 (PST) From: Ian Lance Taylor To: Rafael =?utf-8?Q?=C3=81vila?= de =?utf-8?Q?Esp=C3=ADndola?= Cc: binutils@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [5/6][PATCH] Perform second link stage and ignore now-obsolete linker -pass-through= option. References: <4D684CB8.6020106@gmail.com> <4D684D00.70803@gmail.com> <4D684D69.7060907@gmail.com> <4D687B6C.1030301@mozilla.com> Date: Sun, 27 Feb 2011 18:54:00 -0000 In-Reply-To: <4D687B6C.1030301@mozilla.com> ("Rafael =?utf-8?Q?=C3=81vila?= de =?utf-8?Q?Esp=C3=ADndola=22's?= message of "Fri, 25 Feb 2011 23:02:52 -0500") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.1 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-System-Of-Record: true 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: 2011-02/txt/msg00379.txt.bz2 Rafael =C3=81vila de Esp=C3=ADndola writes: > Assuming this is ok for bfd, would a patch implementing the same logic > be ok for gold? It would be bad to have different interfaces in bfd ld > and gold. What is the actual difference in behaviour? I am going to continue to argue strenuously against rescanning all the symbol tables of the input files in gold. If GNU ld wants to rescan all the symbol tables, I suppose that's OK with me, as long as gold is not required to do it. Ian