https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28262
Steve Dunnagan <sdunnaga at redhat dot com> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |sdunnaga at redhat dot com
--- Comment #6 from Steve Dunnagan <sdunnaga at redhat dot com> ---
I reproduced the issue with the debug info not being available for
this scenario of a special section name and no flags getting specified.
The Binutils documentation has this to say:
COFF:
----
"If no flags are specified, the default flags depend upon the section
name. If the section name is not recognized, the default will be for
the section to be loaded and writable."
ELF:
----
"If no flags are specified, the default flags depend upon the section
name. If the section name is not recognized, the default will be for
the section to have none of the above flags: it will not be allocated
in memory, nor writable, nor executable. The section will contain data."
If we're talking about ELF, the documentation states that the section
will not be considered executable.
My concern about this warning is that users that don't intend for
the section to be executable will get a warning, even though they
may already know the default is that it's not executable. If the
developer is adding code, why not go ahead make the section
executable? Seems like we would just be adding a nuisance warning,
given that the documentation is clear about the default behavior.
My suggestion is that we not add what might be a nuisance warning.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
