[Bug binutils/25120] Portability issues in binutils 2.33 due to libctf

[harald at gigawatt dot nl]

https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25120

--- Comment #3 from Harald van Dijk <harald at gigawatt dot nl> ---
(In reply to Nix from comment #1)
> 4: This is very strange. In 2.33, readelf carefully calls only .o files that
> do not cite BFD functions, even indirectly, so ctf-open-bfd.o is never
> pulled in and BFD is never needed.  (I just checked 2.33, and there are no
> references to any ctf-open-bfd.o functions in anything else in libctf, and
> no references from readelf either. You can figure out what the dead refs are
> by #if 0'ing out the contents of libctf/ctf-open-bfd.c and doing make
> all-libctf, then rebuilding readelf and seeing what the reported locus of
> undefined symbol errors is now. (objdump will, obviously, fail to build if
> you do this, because it uses the functions you just removed, but that's not
> a problem).

If I comment out the entire file, readelf links successfully. It seems that
with tcc, merely being included in libctf.a is enough to require its
dependencies to be present as well.

> In trunk, we generate two .a / .so's, one containing ctf-open-bfd.o and the
> other not, in part to make this separation more explicit, but I really
> thought I had it working in 2.33 too.

Well, what's in 2.33 does work with gcc... Having two separate libraries seems
like it should satisfy tcc.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.