--- Additional Comments From amodra at bigpond dot net dot au 2008-03-11
00:49 ---
I am to blame, and can't find anything to defend the current binutils behaviour.
i.e. I agree with Ian that this is a bug.
--
http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=5900
--- You are recei
--- Additional Comments From ian at airs dot com 2008-03-10 21:25 ---
I don't see anything in the ABI which says they have special meanings. And I
certainly don't see anything in the ABI which says that code should add 256 to
section indexes when stored. I think it would be important to
--- Additional Comments From hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2008-03-10
20:43 ---
(In reply to comment #12)
> > That means we can't use from SHN_UNDEF and SHN_LORESERVE to SHN_HIRESERVE
> > anywhere else.
>
> No, it doesn't. It only means that you can't use them in contexts "where
> in
--- Additional Comments From ian at airs dot com 2008-03-10 20:03 ---
> That means we can't use from SHN_UNDEF and SHN_LORESERVE to SHN_HIRESERVE
> anywhere else.
No, it doesn't. It only means that you can't use them in contexts "where index
size is restricted."
--
http://sourcewar
--- Additional Comments From hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2008-03-10
19:14 ---
gABI says:
Some section header table indexes are reserved in contexts where index size is
restricted, for example, the st_shndx member of a symbol table entry and the
e_shnum and e_shstrndx members of the E
--- Additional Comments From ian at airs dot com 2008-03-10 19:04 ---
Don't confuse the notion of section index with the special codes between
SHN_LORESERVE and SHN_HIRESERVE. Those special codes are used in the st_shndx
field of a Sym structure. They are not meaningful elsewhere--in p
--- Additional Comments From hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2008-03-10
18:28 ---
(In reply to comment #8)
> gABI says:
>
> sh_link Unspecified If non-zero, the index of the section header string table
> section
>
> So sh_link isn't "section index", it is the section header index. What
--- Additional Comments From hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2008-03-10
18:09 ---
gABI says:
sh_link Unspecified If non-zero, the index of the section header string table
section
So sh_link isn't "section index", it is the section header index. What
else did binutils get wrong?
--
h
--- Additional Comments From ian at airs dot com 2008-03-10 17:39 ---
I raised the issue on generic-abi here:
http://groups.google.com/group/generic-abi/browse_frm/thread/e8bb63714b072e67
--
http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=5900
--- You are receiving this mail bec
--- Additional Comments From ian at airs dot com 2008-03-10 17:09 ---
I compiled the original test case with icc 8.1. I ran readelf -s. Here are
some excerpts:
65279: 0 SECTION LOCAL DEFAULT 65278 section_65270
65280: 0 SECTION LOCAL DEFAULT 65279 section_
--
What|Removed |Added
CC||hjl dot tools at gmail dot
||com
http://sourceware.org/bugzilla
--
What|Removed |Added
Severity|minor |normal
http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=5905
--- You are receiving this mail because: -
please consider following testcase:
$ cat bug.cpp
void f() { }
$ g++ -fpic bug.cpp -o libbug.so -shared -z defs \
-nodefaultlibs -nostartfiles -lsupc++ libc_pic.a
imho it should work fine, but linker produces an error:
/usr/bin/ld: libbug.so: version node not found for symbol
pthread_cond_de
13 matches
Mail list logo
