[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Bug ld/16833] New: ld refuses to mix ordered and unordered sections
From: |
ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE |
Subject: |
[Bug ld/16833] New: ld refuses to mix ordered and unordered sections |
Date: |
Fri, 11 Apr 2014 12:44:18 +0000 |
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16833
Bug ID: 16833
Summary: ld refuses to mix ordered and unordered sections
Product: binutils
Version: 2.24
Status: NEW
Severity: normal
Priority: P2
Component: ld
Assignee: unassigned at sourceware dot org
Reporter: ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE
Host: i386-pc-solaris2.11
Target: i386-pc-solaris2.11
Build: i386-pc-solaris2.11
While testing a new Solaris/x86 assembler that does support cfi directives, I
ran
into a link failure while bootstrapping gcc mainline with that /bin/as and gld
2.24:
/vol/gcc/bin/gld-2.24: .eh_frame has both ordered [`.eh_frame' in _muldi3_s.o]
and unordered [`.eh_frame' in /usr/lib/amd64/crti.o] sections
/vol/gcc/bin/gld-2.24: final link failed: Bad value
collect2: error: ld returned 1 exit status
/bin/as sets SHF_LINK_ORDER in .eh_frame, but as you can see, the bundled
crti.o
lacks that flag.
The question is: what's the basis for this refusal: I see nothing of the kind
in the current ELF gABI:
http://www.sco.com/developers/gabi/latest/ch4.sheader.html
I see that this check (without the error messages) is already in the original
submission:
[patch] Honour SHF_LINK_ORDER
https://sourceware.org/ml/binutils/2004-07/msg00197.html
and
https://sourceware.org/ml/binutils/2004-07/msg00200.html
but no justification either.
Why not just emit the sections with SHF_LINK_ORDER set in order and add in the
rest behind?
Rainer
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
[Prev in Thread] |
Current Thread |
[Next in Thread] |
- [Bug ld/16833] New: ld refuses to mix ordered and unordered sections,
ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE <=