This is the mail archive of the
binutils@sources.redhat.com
mailing list for the binutils project.
Re: PPC relocs in shared libraries
- From: Alan Modra <amodra at bigpond dot net dot au>
- To: Richard Henderson <rth at redhat dot com>, Ian Lance Taylor <ian at zembu dot com>
- Cc: Jakub Jelinek <jakub at redhat dot com>, Geoff Keating <geoffk at geoffk dot org>, binutils at sources dot redhat dot com
- Date: Tue, 1 Oct 2002 17:13:44 +0930
- Subject: Re: PPC relocs in shared libraries
- References: <20020925220209.GA8201@nevyn.them.org> <200209252309.g8PN9YG18648@desire.geoffk.org> <20020926193900.GA31145@nevyn.them.org> <20020927144437.H14457@bubble.sa.bigpond.net.au> <20020927130435.GA3791@nevyn.them.org> <20020927090755.E21220@devserv.devel.redhat.com> <20020927165404.GH19327@redhat.com>
On Fri, Sep 27, 2002 at 09:54:04AM -0700, Richard Henderson wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 27, 2002 at 09:07:55AM -0400, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> > I still don't understand why GDB needs to care about reloc sections in
> > ET_DYN/ET_EXEC.
>
> The relocation is the only way to associate the real address with the
> debug info in the case of dynamic linker overrides.
Hmm, OK. ld.so won't do the reloc for gdb though, will it? So gdb
will need to be quite clever about symbol resolution. No reason not
to emit the relocs though, except to reduce file size.
My recollection is that there was some question over whether it is
correct to emit debug section relocs for stabs, and that's why many
binutils targets don't emit debug relocs. Ian?
--
Alan Modra
IBM OzLabs - Linux Technology Centre