This is the mail archive of the binutils@sources.redhat.com mailing list for the binutils project.

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]

Re: bfd.flags&DYNAMIC vs. bfd_link_info.static

To: John Reiser <jreiser at BitWagon dot com>
Subject: Re: bfd.flags&DYNAMIC vs. bfd_link_info.static
From: Alan Modra <amodra at bigpond dot net dot au>
Date: Sat, 2 Jun 2001 23:37:36 +0930
Cc: binutils at sources dot redhat dot com
References: <991410192.21718.ezmlm@sources.redhat.com> <3B17DE86.DBAB8D23@BitWagon.com> <20010601120832.A7786@lucon.org> <3B17F612.7DACA4C2@BitWagon.com> <20010601132102.B8818@lucon.org> <3B1817A1.255A470B@BitWagon.com>

On Fri, Jun 01, 2001 at 03:30:57PM -0700, John Reiser wrote:
> This change helps, so far.
> The NONE relocation is still present in .rel.got, but the slot itself
> already has been relocated (output is ET_EXEC (no -shared), not ET_DYN).

I'm in the middle of fixing this, as I did for elf32-hppa.c just recently.

-- 
Alan Modra

References:
- bfd.flags&DYNAMIC vs. bfd_link_info.static
  - From: John Reiser
- Re: bfd.flags&DYNAMIC vs. bfd_link_info.static
  - From: H . J . Lu
- Re: bfd.flags&DYNAMIC vs. bfd_link_info.static
  - From: John Reiser
- Re: bfd.flags&DYNAMIC vs. bfd_link_info.static
  - From: H . J . Lu
- Re: bfd.flags&DYNAMIC vs. bfd_link_info.static
  - From: John Reiser

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]