Jakub Jelinek jakub@redhat.com
Fri Feb 14 21:26:00 GMT 2003

• Previous message (by thread): Dwarf 2 section flags ?
• Next message (by thread): STT_SECTION STB_LOCAL syms in .dynsym section for non-SHF_ALLOC sections
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

---

Hi!

What do you think about not emitting symbols like:
    24: 00000000     0 SECTION LOCAL  DEFAULT   24
    25: 00000000     0 SECTION LOCAL  DEFAULT   25
    26: 00000000     0 SECTION LOCAL  DEFAULT   26
    27: 00000000     0 SECTION LOCAL  DEFAULT   27
    28: 00000000     0 SECTION LOCAL  DEFAULT   28
    29: 00000000     0 SECTION LOCAL  DEFAULT   29
    30: 00000000     0 SECTION LOCAL  DEFAULT   30
for the non-allocated sections in the .dynsym section?
IMHO it is pure bloat, especially if there are many non-alloced sections
and e.g. when linking shared lib with -s or -S the result is different
from linking without it and doing strip afterwards.
On arches which don't emit .rel{,a}* sections for non-ALLOCed sections
it should not make a difference, and even for those which do I think
those non-ALLOCed .rel{,a} sections should be sh_link'ed against .symtab,
not .dynsym.

	Jakub

---

• Previous message (by thread): Dwarf 2 section flags ?
• Next message (by thread): STT_SECTION STB_LOCAL syms in .dynsym section for non-SHF_ALLOC sections
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

---

More information about the Binutils mailing list