http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=13991
--- Comment #3 from Ralf Corsépius <ralf.corsepius at rtems dot org> 2012-04-20 16:24:25 UTC --- (In reply to comment #2) > (In reply to comment #1) > > I don't think this is a bug in binutils, but a bug in RTEMS. > > > > cf. http://www.rtems.org/pipermail/rtems-users/2012-April/009843.html > > I respectfully think you are completely wrong. That change is a hack in the > linker script to ignore the start address in __rtems_start that in the linked > executable. It may be zero on some of the BSP variants using this linker > script > but it is a hack. My understanding of what is happening is RTEMS's linker script is accessing an _uninitialized_ symbol, something newer binutils seeming do not allow anymore. What my "hack" (I call it a fix to a defect in this linkerscript) is to conditionally initialize it to 0, if it's unused. The only change this does is to make an implicit initialization to 0 explict. > This linker script and procedure has been in RTEMS since around 1999. The file > only has 3 changes in that entire time. From what I can gather, binutils has changed its behavior. > http://git.rtems.org/rtems/log/c/src/lib/libbsp/powerpc/shared/bootloader/ppcboot.lds > > The hack may be a work around but ld broke. No, binutils has changed behavior and RTEMS is victim of this behavioral change. -- 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 bug-binutils@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
