bfd is broken

Jakub Jelinek jakub@redhat.com
Fri Jan 11 09:38:00 GMT 2002

Previous message (by thread): bfd is broken
Next message (by thread): bfd is broken
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

On Fri, Jan 11, 2002 at 09:22:22AM -0800, H . J . Lu wrote:
> > E.g. if a.s has:
> > .section ".rodata.str1.1", "aMS", @progbits, 1
> > .LC1: .asciiz "foobar"
> > .LC2: .asciiz "bogusstr"
> > 
> > and b.s has:
> > .section ".rodata.str1.1", "aMS", @progbits, 1
> > .LC3: .asciiz "bar"
> > .LC4: .asciiz "str"
> > 
> > then b.o's .rodata.str1.1 section will be SEC_EXCLUDE, but .LC3 needs to be
> > translated to .LC1 + 3 and .LC4 to .LC2 + 5.
> 
> I believe it is what happened in my case. May I suggest to back out
> the broken patch? We will fix it later when a testcase is provided?

Geoff sais where is the testcase (gcc testsuite gcsec-1.c).
I was looking for a testcase where it failed for you, so if you think the
above is what happens, no further need for it (though it should probably
be added as a testcase for ld).

	Jakub

Previous message (by thread): bfd is broken
Next message (by thread): bfd is broken
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

More information about the Binutils mailing list