This is the mail archive of the
binutils@sourceware.org
mailing list for the binutils project.
Re: ld -z options
Talking to myself...
On Thu, 14 Jul 2011, Hans-Peter Nilsson wrote:
> This caused several test-cases to go from PASS to UNRESOLVED for
> cris-axis-linux-gnu
It seems this would happen for e.g. ia64-*-linux-gnu too.
> All preceded by a linker warning ".../ld-new: warning: -z relro
> ignored." in ld.log. The UNRESOLVED status then cause the
> check-ld to return error. According to the dejagnu docs, the
> UNRESOLVED is an indication of an error in the testsuite (likely
> the unexpected warning).
That's a bug in ld-elf/binutils.exp or the new warning message;
binutils.exp tests [string match "*not supported*" $link_output]
|| [string match "*unrecognized option*" $link_output]
which doesn't match "warning: -z relro ignored.".
Which one should be adjusted?
> Hm, at a second glance many other ports set
> COMMONPAGESIZE="CONSTANT (COMMONPAGESIZE)" which for some reason
> triggers the recognition of e.g. "-z relro" but why would I have
> to set that when there's just one page-size?
This seems the wrong default, and emulparams/elf64_ia64.sh
should set something to disable -z relro instead of everyone
else setting some vaguely related variable. Or is that's too
linux-centric? Maybe create a ${srcdir}/emulparams/linux-common.sh
for emulparams/*.sh to include?
> And aren't the tests not really testing -z relro
> if they passed anyway?
Doh, they aren't testing that option, that's just a combination
tested for objcopy/strip/whatever producing the same result
with/without that option.
brgds, H-P