https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19623
Nick Clifton <nickc at redhat dot com> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |nickc at redhat dot com
--- Comment #1 from Nick Clifton <nickc at redhat dot com> ---
Hi Leon,
> b) the call to _bfd_clear_contents seems to be undesirable in my SCO scenario
This intrigues me, and I suspect is the core of the problem. Do you have any
idea as to why this should make a difference ? On the surface the purpose
seems
clear: the reloc being cleared references a section that is going to be
discarded. so there is no point in processing, or retaining, the reloc.
> Unfortunately I cannot provide you with the object files I am linking
> because they are proprietary but If you are really need a test case, I might
> be able to to program a minimal test case which reflects my problem.
Please do try - I think that we are going to need one.
If we are going to have to make an SCO specific patch, (which is undesirable,
but appears to be the case in this situation), then we will need a way to make
sure that it works, and that it does not break other COFF targets.
Cheers
Nick
--
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
