This is the mail archive of the
binutils@sources.redhat.com
mailing list for the binutils project.
Re: bug in .eh_frame_hdr processing
- From: Andrew Haley <aph at redhat dot com>
- To: binutils at sources dot redhat dot com
- Date: Wed, 5 Mar 2003 17:35:44 +0000 (GMT)
- Subject: Re: bug in .eh_frame_hdr processing
- References: <15959.55690.99080.372808@masala.cambridge.redhat.com><20030223065829.GD535@redhat.com><15960.43501.654884.532629@cuddles.cambridge.redhat.com><20030224051118.GY31111@bubble.sa.bigpond.net.au><15966.21503.394413.466465@masala.cambridge.redhat.com>
Andrew Haley writes:
> Alan Modra writes:
> > On Sun, Feb 23, 2003 at 11:01:01AM +0000, Andrew Haley wrote:
> > > Richard Henderson writes:
> > > > On Sat, Feb 22, 2003 at 08:11:54PM +0000, Andrew Haley wrote:
> > > > > Alternatively, perhaps we shouldn't do this optimization at all when
> > > > > generating relocateable output, but instead postpone it until final
> > > > > link.
> > > >
> > > > I'd prefer this.
> > >
> > > Me too. It's simpler, and safer.
> >
> > Yes, given that this is at least the second ld -r problem found in the
> > eh_frame editing code, I think I made a mistake in enabling the
> > optimization for ld -r. It wouldn't hurt to commit your fix though.
>
> Jakub sent me this patch in email:
>
> 2003-02-27 Jakub Jelinek <jakub at redhat dot com>
> Andrew Haley <aph at redhat dot com>
>
> * elflink.h (elf_bfd_discard_info): Don't process eh frames if
> output is relocateable.
Well, shall I apply it then?
Andrew.