https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18440
--- Comment #2 from Rafael Ávila de Espíndola <rafael.espindola at gmail dot com> --- > > This unfortunately doesn't work if the compiler avoids producing the long > > section names (as llvm now can). > > Can we use the symbol name directly? That would be nice. Which is why I asked: > > Is there a convenient pass over the symbols that could be used for this > > instead? Looks like there is, could we use the walk done from Symbol_table::add_from_relob to check if a section has just a constructor in it? We already use that walk to mark symbols as gc roots. -- 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
