This is the mail archive of the binutils@sources.redhat.com mailing list for the binutils project.

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format:	[Raw text]

Re: mn10300: relaxing vs section merging

From: Alan Modra <amodra at bigpond dot net dot au>
To: DJ Delorie <dj at redhat dot com>
Cc: aoliva at redhat dot com, binutils at sources dot redhat dot com
Date: Wed, 26 May 2004 08:38:33 +0930
Subject: Re: mn10300: relaxing vs section merging
References: <200405051818.i45IIicE005437@greed.delorie.com> <orn04mt4bk.fsf@livre.redhat.lsd.ic.unicamp.br> <200405062032.i46KWb8g023860@greed.delorie.com> <or3c66k2wg.fsf@free.redhat.lsd.ic.unicamp.br> <20040512013503.GA3055@bubble.modra.org> <200405252047.i4PKldZK012671@greed.delorie.com>

On Tue, May 25, 2004 at 04:47:39PM -0400, DJ Delorie wrote:
> Ok, so can I commit my patch then?  It sounds like I'm doing the right
> thing...

It doesn't look right to me.  You are adding irel->r_addend to symval
where you previously did not.

-- 
Alan Modra
IBM OzLabs - Linux Technology Centre

Follow-Ups:
- Re: mn10300: relaxing vs section merging
  - From: DJ Delorie

References:
- mn10300: relaxing vs section merging
  - From: DJ Delorie
- Re: mn10300: relaxing vs section merging
  - From: Alexandre Oliva
- Re: mn10300: relaxing vs section merging
  - From: DJ Delorie
- Re: mn10300: relaxing vs section merging
  - From: Alexandre Oliva
- Re: mn10300: relaxing vs section merging
  - From: Alan Modra
- Re: mn10300: relaxing vs section merging
  - From: DJ Delorie

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]