Re: mn10300: clarify a diagnostic

[Eric Christopher <echristo at apple dot com>]

On Oct 16, 2006, at 7:18 PM, DJ Delorie wrote:

> We only flag bfd_reloc_dangerous in one situation, yet the message for
> that error is void of meaning.  I propose we emit something more
> useful...
>
> 	* elf-m10300 (mn10300_elf_relocate_section): Make diagnostic
> 	more specific.
>
> Index: elf-m10300.c
> ===================================================================
> RCS file: /cvs/cvsfiles/gnupro/bfd/elf-m10300.c,v
> retrieving revision 1.12.8.1.4.16
> diff -p -U3 -r1.12.8.1.4.16 elf-m10300.c
> --- elf-m10300.c	14 Feb 2006 22:20:08 -0000	1.12.8.1.4.16
> +++ elf-m10300.c	17 Oct 2006 02:14:23 -0000
> @@ -2143,7 +2143,7 @@ mn10300_elf_relocate_section (output_bfd
>  	      goto common_error;
>
>  	    case bfd_reloc_dangerous:
> -	      msg = _("internal error: dangerous error");
> +	      msg = _("warning: non-PIC relocation seen during shared  
> library link");

Hmm? We're returning bfd_reloc_dangerous for gotoff relocations which  
are, admittedly link time, but they're off the got so I don't know  
that the message is quite correct. Maybe "warning: local relocation  
against non-local symbol seen when linking a shared object"?

-eric