------- Additional Comments From jreiser at BitWagon dot com 2008-04-29 20:46 ------- Subject: Re: ld: --export-dynamic fails if no undefined symbols
drow at false dot org wrote: > ------- Additional Comments From drow at false dot org 2008-04-29 19:48 > ------- > Subject: Re: ld: --export-dynamic fails if no undefined > symbols > > On Tue, Apr 29, 2008 at 06:54:37PM -0000, jreiser at BitWagon dot com wrote: > >>[Did I cover everything that should be changd? ;-)] > Well, you'd also need a PT_INTERP. Probably more. The executable has no undefined symbols (.e_entry receives control), and in particular it needs no PT_INTERP. >>What was the specific objection to --force-dynamic on non-VxWorks? > I don't remember, but I'm sure you can find it in the list archives. http://sourceware.org/ml/binutils/2006-03/msg00020.html "Add --force-dynamic flag to VxWorks targets" is the software itself, but I could find no indication of objections by non-VxWorks targets. I saw just 16 matches to a search for "--force-dynamic" [_with_ quotation marks: try not to ignore punctuation] and none had any discussion about non-VxWorks targets, or including or excluding the ability to force a Dynamic section. I'd like to separate mechanism from policy, so that non-traditional uses can ask for, and get, logical features without regard to who else has used or not used them in the past. -- http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=6468 ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. _______________________________________________ bug-binutils mailing list bug-binutils@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
