DJ Delorie dj@redhat.com
Mon Jul 18 19:59:00 GMT 2005

• Previous message (by thread): bfd/elf/mn10300 "dangerous error"
• Next message (by thread): bfd/elf/mn10300 "dangerous error"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

---

> I know!  We need a control variable for every error and warning
> message, and then some way to manage the control variables from the
> command line.  Isn't somebody doing that in gcc-land?

Touché.

What I meant, was, if our target has its own "style" of shared
libraries, more specific than the generic shared library support BFD
offers, can it tell the BFD that it needs this more specific format?
Or would that be a new BFD, derived from the generic one, a new
emulation, or just a command line option?

That way, we could differentiate (for example) uClinux-style PIC from
MMU-ful Linux style PIC.

(it's issues like this that make me wish bfd was implemented in C++.
Virtual functions for these handlers would be *so* nice)

---

• Previous message (by thread): bfd/elf/mn10300 "dangerous error"
• Next message (by thread): bfd/elf/mn10300 "dangerous error"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

---

More information about the Binutils mailing list