This is the mail archive of the
binutils@sources.redhat.com
mailing list for the binutils project.
Re: bfd/elf/mn10300 "dangerous error"
DJ Delorie <dj@redhat.com> writes:
> > The notion of what dangerous means is target dependent. Some
> > dangerous relocs should only be warnings. Some should be fatal
> > errors. I don't know which is the case for elf-m10300.c.
>
> Yeah, I was hoping someone would know the history. The relocs in
> question are non-pic relocs in a shared library, seemed kinda fatal to
> me.
Again, it depends. You can put non-PIC code in a shared library, on
x86, for example. The resulting code can't actually be shared, but
you might still want to use a shared library for name space control.
Or you might just be confused.
> Is there any historical precedent for having a linker (or emulation)
> option to control how fatal those cases should be?
There is --no-warn-mismatch and --warn-common, which are sort of
similar. I can't think of anything else offhand.
I know! We need a control variable for every error and warning
message, and then some way to manage the control variables from the
command line. Isn't somebody doing that in gcc-land?
Ian