https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18147
--- Comment #3 from Alan Modra <amodra at gmail dot com> --- Here is my thinking, FWIW. What is the value of an undefined symbol? Why should a branch to zero not report an overflow, if there is indeed an overflow? Try linking the same testcase on x86_64, but with -Ttext=0x100000000. ld/ld-new -o pr18147 pr18147.o --unresolved-symbols=ignore-all -Ttext=0x100000000 ld/ld-new: warning: cannot find entry symbol _start; defaulting to 0000000100000000 pr18147.o: In function `f1': pr18147.c:(.text+0x3): relocation truncated to fit: R_X86_64_PC32 against undefined symbol `f2' gold on x86_64 doesn't report an error, but that is simply because gold on x86_64 doesn't report relocation overflows, a serious defect IMO. gold/ld-new -o pr18147 pr18147.o --defsym f2=0 -Ttext=0x100000000 => no error -- 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
