.relr.dyn, binutils 2.37 and glibc 2.36
Alan Modra
amodra@gmail.com
Tue Sep 13 08:05:42 GMT 2022
More information about the Binutils mailing list
Tue Sep 13 08:05:42 GMT 2022
- Previous message (by thread): .relr.dyn, binutils 2.37 and glibc 2.36
- Next message (by thread): [PATCH,pushed] ppc: Document the -mfuture and -Mfuture options and make them usable
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
On Mon, Sep 12, 2022 at 02:27:24PM -0400, Tom Kacvinsky via Binutils wrote: > I have seen lots of stuff float by on the glibc and binutils list about > changes to each related to relocations. My I've lost track of what > changes have been made. I am not sure if this should be posted to > the glibc list or here, so I am trying here first instead of cross posting. > > I have a colleague that is using a glibc 2.36 based system and is > using binutils 2.37 (one that I built from source, not the system ld). > > This is the error he gets > > /opt/binutils-2.37/bin/ld: /lib64/libc.so.6: unknown type [0x13] section > `.relr.dyn' For a very long time ld.bfd has rejected object files with unknown ELF sections. Quite possibly it would be better if ld.bfd accepted dynamic objects with unknown section types, but that's the way it works now. > But then he follows up that while ld.bfd doesn't work, ld.gold (i.e., > -fuse-ld=gold) > does work. > > My recollection is that the changes made in the newer versions of glibc for > relocations required a newer binutils (2.38, I think). Yes. -- Alan Modra Australia Development Lab, IBM
- Previous message (by thread): .relr.dyn, binutils 2.37 and glibc 2.36
- Next message (by thread): [PATCH,pushed] ppc: Document the -mfuture and -Mfuture options and make them usable
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
More information about the Binutils mailing list