http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=12760
--- Comment #6 from H.J. Lu <hjl.tools at gmail dot com> 2011-05-16 01:41:35
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #5)
> The patch I've committed isn't a full fix, since it results in a warning being
> emitted when the real object file defines the warning symbol. This is too
> early. The symbol may not even be referenced in the real object file.
I am using:
diff --git a/ld/ldmain.c b/ld/ldmain.c
index 8647e36..84ac2ae 100644 (file)
--- a/ld/ldmain.c
+++ b/ld/ldmain.c
@@ -1187,7 +1187,7 @@ warning_callback (struct bfd_link_info *info
ATTRIBUTE_UNUSED,
einfo ("%P: %s%s\n", _("warning: "), warning);
else if (symbol == NULL)
einfo ("%B: %s%s\n", abfd, _("warning: "), warning);
- else
+ else if ((abfd->flags & BFD_PLUGIN) == 0)
{
struct warning_callback_info cinfo;
It doesn't make any senses to issue warning against plugin dummy.
--
Configure bugmail: http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.
_______________________________________________
bug-binutils mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
