Re: BFD bug with elf*-sparc sections?

2005-07-11 Thread Eric Botcazou
> Running the native "elfdump -c" will show that there are 12 sections. > > [output of elfdump -c: > http://www.cs.cornell.edu/marques/bfdexample/elfdump.txt ] > > Running "objdump -h" (2.16 and 2.13) shows only 7 sections. > > [output of objdump -h: > http://www.cs.cornell.edu/marques/bfdexample/

Re: BFD bug with elf*-sparc sections?

2005-07-11 Thread Eric Botcazou
> Yes it does. I wonder how it is implemented differently than objcopy > and objdump... My understanding is that objcopy has far less knowledge about the ELF format than readelf, and in particular about section group like item #3. > Anyway, the bug I am reporting is that using objcopy (even jus

Re: BFD bug with elf*-sparc sections?

2005-07-11 Thread Daniel Marques
The output of readelf -h (2.16) looks correct to me: Yes it does. I wonder how it is implemented differently than objcopy and objdump... Anyway, the bug I am reporting is that using objcopy (even just to duplicate a .o file) is making SunPro C++ objects unlinkable. Using the source f

Re: BFD bug with elf*-sparc sections?

2005-07-11 Thread Eric Botcazou
> Maybe I'm confused as to the purpose of objcopy, and binutils in > general. Is the purpose of binutils only to work with binaries created > with the gnu tool chain? Or is it to work on any binaries created for a > platform? The latter I think, but it is obviously not (very) tested with compiler

Re: BFD bug with elf*-sparc sections?

2005-07-11 Thread Daniel Marques
My understanding is that objcopy has far less knowledge about the ELF format than readelf, and in particular about section group like item #3. May I ask you why you need to use Binutils with SunPro C++? AFAIK Sun doesn't implement the common C++ ABI. Maybe I'm confused as to the pu