This is the mail archive of the
binutils@sources.redhat.com
mailing list for the binutils project.
Re: RFC: More stuff in struct bfd_link_info
- From: Michael Meissner <meissner at cygnus dot com>
- To: Hans-Peter Nilsson <hp at bitrange dot com>
- Cc: binutils at sources dot redhat dot com
- Date: Wed, 9 Jan 2002 15:57:59 -0500
- Subject: Re: RFC: More stuff in struct bfd_link_info
- References: <Pine.BSF.4.30.0201082051420.11490-100000@dair.pair.com>
On Tue, Jan 08, 2002 at 09:05:47PM -0500, Hans-Peter Nilsson wrote:
> There's a some target-specific cruft in struct bfd_link_info
> (for example "int mpc860c0" and "boolean pei386_auto_import")
> that could go away (or at least not accumulate) if there was
> just a target-specific PTR member, say "PTR target_data".
>
> Also, I'd like to move "boolean relax" from ld.h:args_type to
> struct bfd_link_info, so bfd functions can see whether
> relaxation should be done, and perhaps also set it (only) when
> necessary; for example if some presumably costly relaxation only
> needs to be done if certain relocs are present.
>
> Thoughts?
One historic problem with target-specific PTR members has been when somebody
wants to write the program file in another format (S-records, ihex, etc.).
These formats don't have the target-specific PTR members. I tend to advise
people, link for the standard object file format, and then use objcopy to make
a S-record afterwards, instead of telling the linker to make S-records
directly.
--
Michael Meissner, Red Hat, Inc. (GCC group)
PMB 198, 174 Littleton Road #3, Westford, Massachusetts 01886, USA
Work: meissner@redhat.com phone: +1 978-486-9304
Non-work: meissner@spectacle-pond.org fax: +1 978-692-4482