Re: [RFC] QNX Neutrino/i386 support

["Kris Warkentin" <kewarken at qnx dot com>]

> > I'm still struggling with the shared library stuff.  There's something
> > fishy in there, but it seems that the comment in nto-tdep.c is wrong,
> > or at least outdated.
>
> There have been some fairly long thread on the mailing list about the
solib
> issue.  Look for threads 'relocation of shared libs not based at 0'
starting
> back in November/December and some more recently.  You may be right about
> the comment - I should take a look at it again but the long and the short
of
> it is that we have a slightly different interpretation of the way
> relocations are done.  Our chief architect can explain it better but it's
> possible that neither interpretation is wrong - one treats two base
> addresses as the same, the other doesn't.  Either way, the override of
> relocate_section_addresses is ABSOLUTELY required.  If this is not done,
> global data in shared objects will be off by a page.

Aha.  Found relevant explanation from our chief architect.

http://sources.redhat.com/ml/gdb/2003-02/msg00202.html

cheers,

Kris