This is the mail archive of the binutils@sourceware.org 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]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: Release 2.26 - Next week ?


On Tue, Jan 12, 2016 at 05:11:53PM -0800, H.J. Lu wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 12, 2016 at 5:04 PM, Alan Modra <amodra@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 10:21:08AM +0100, Tristan Gingold wrote:
> >>
> >> > On 08 Jan 2016, at 18:26, Matthias Klose <doko@ubuntu.com> wrote:
> >> > - PR 19421, but currently only a bug report
> >
> > Now analysed.  The ppc64le kernel problem is due to needing to keep
> > undefined symbols.  I'd say it is also a kernel bug that the symbol in
> > question isn't defined, but that's really another issue.  The point is
> > that we have a GNU ld use case where removing undefined symbols breaks
> > an existing program.
> >
> >> Letâs exclude it.
> >
> > I'm of two minds about this.  PR3417 wants undefined symbols to be
> > removed:  "When the reference to __tls_get_addr is removed, it leaves
> > undefined symbol in symtab.  It is confusing."  H.J. what exactly was
> > confusing?  When I made the PR3417 patch, I thought PR3417 was mostly
> > about cosmetics and figured that removing undefined symbols was
> > reasonably safe.  If it is true that PR3417 was only cosmetic, I think
> > my patch ought to be reverted.
> >
> 
> Is PR3417 the right PR?

No, sorry.  https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=4317

-- 
Alan Modra
Australia Development Lab, IBM


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