This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the binutils project.
Re: i386-pc-nto-qnx patch
- From: <gp at qnx dot com>
- To: "H . J . Lu" <hjl at lucon dot org>, "Graeme Peterson" <gp at qnx dot com>
- Cc: <jtc at acorntoolworks dot com>, <binutils at sources dot redhat dot com>
- Date: Thu, 25 Apr 2002 16:54:20 -0000
- Subject: Re: i386-pc-nto-qnx patch
"H . J . Lu" <email@example.com> said:
> On Thu, Apr 25, 2002 at 11:58:59AM -0400, Graeme Peterson wrote:
> > About the ELF interpreter. We have a different loader version in
> > 6.1+ than in pre 6.1. We handle this in gcc (specs) and in our
> > front end 'qcc' (conf files).
> > This is how we have done it and will probably continue to do it.
> > It is how we ship our tools chain, and if we need to update the
> > loader again, then the specs and conf files for that OS version
> > will reflect it.
> > It seems to me that it is six of one, half a dozen of the other as to
> > whether this gets done in gcc or binutils. My preference is gcc,
> > because we need to have a QNX specific specs file anyway, this is
> > how we already do it, and this limits the number of QNX specific
> > changes that need to be rolled in and maintained in binutils.
> Linux passes "-dynamic-linker /lib/ld.xxxx" to ld from gcc. I think
> it is more flexible. We strongly discourage using ld directly for
> generating DSOs and executables on Linux.
Yup. "--dynamic-linker /usr/lib/ldqnx.so.2" in our specs and conf files.