https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22450
--- Comment #2 from H.J. Lu <hjl.tools at gmail dot com> --- (In reply to Nick Clifton from comment #1) > Created attachment 10611 [details] > Proposed patch > > Hi H.J. > > What do you think of this patch ? > > I was wondering if we should complain if we do not find any suitable bfd > (ie has_properties == TRUE, first_pfd == NULL and there was an input file > of the correct class and machine code). But I guess that if the user has > not supplied an object file with the .note.gnu.property section then they > probably do not want one in the output file either. > It works for me. Can you extract the testcase from https://sourceware.org/ml/binutils/2017-11/msg00304.html We need to verify that the bogus note is removed from output and there is no .note.gnu.property section in output neither. -- 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
