This is the mail archive of the
binutils@sourceware.cygnus.com
mailing list for the binutils project.
Re: ld -r breakage
- To: alan at linuxcare dot com dot au
- Subject: Re: ld -r breakage
- From: Nick Clifton <nickc at cygnus dot com>
- Date: Tue, 13 Jun 2000 10:29:38 -0700
- CC: rth at cygnus dot com, jakub at redhat dot com, binutils at sourceware dot cygnus dot com
Hi Alan,
: > OK, but I still think that the reason that 'ld -r' does not change the
: > SEC_READONLY attribute of the text section should be a consequence of
: > the fact that config.text_read_only is true, and not of the fact that
: > link_info.relocatable is true.
:
: Hmm. We started with (1)
: config.text_read_only true => make .text read only
: config.text_read_only false => don't change .text attributes
:
: This was buggy because "ld -N" needs to mark .text read/write
:
: Then we went to (2)
: config.text_read_only true => make .text read only
: config.text_read_only false => make .text read/write
:
: This is again incorrect because "ld -r" cleared config.text_read_only so
: as to leave the section attributes unchanged as per (1). Under (2), we
: get a read/write .text section.
:
: I suggested testing link_info.relocatable so that "ld -r" would again
: leave the section attributes unchanged. It's true that the patch I
: submitted should have removed the unnecessary clearing of
: config.text_read_only for `-r' (and `-Ur').
:
: Now you seem to be saying (3)
: config.text_read_only true => don't change .text attributes
: config.text_read_only false => make .text read/write
:
: ??
OK - sorry for all this confusion. I actually agree with scenario (2)
above, although I obviously did not express myself clearly. If you
would care to resubmit your patch (with the fix to -r and -Ur that you
mention above) then I will be happy yto approve it.
Cheers
Nick