This is the mail archive of the
binutils@sourceware.org
mailing list for the binutils project.
Re: [PATCH] ld/ldlang.c: fatal error on architecture mismatch
- From: Daniel Jacobowitz <drow at false dot org>
- To: Ian Lance Taylor <iant at google dot com>
- Cc: Alan Modra <amodra at bigpond dot net dot au>, Robert Millan <rmh at aybabtu dot com>, binutils at sourceware dot org
- Date: Tue, 1 May 2007 13:17:06 -0400
- Subject: Re: [PATCH] ld/ldlang.c: fatal error on architecture mismatch
- References: <20070428185723.GA27973@aragorn> <20070430082136.GB13774@bubble.grove.modra.org> <20070430111937.GA27826@caradoc.them.org> <20070501084910.GA28572@bubble.grove.modra.org> <m3irbcjxmh.fsf@localhost.localdomain>
On Tue, May 01, 2007 at 09:51:18AM -0700, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
> Alan Modra <amodra@bigpond.net.au> writes:
>
> > > While we're on the subject of errors, it bugs me that the linker warns
> > > and auto-selects an address if you don't provide _start or specify an
> > > entry point. How do you feel about making that fatal?
> >
> > It might impact the testsuite. Otherwise I'm OK with the idea.
>
> This would be a bad idea as it would break a number of embedded
> builds. Embedded systems generally ignore the entry address anyhow.
It's for embedded builds that I want it. The other thing it's
likely to mean is "you forgot to link with a suitable crt0",
especially where you have more than one sensible option so the
compiler can't do it by default.
Would it really be so bad to make people specify where execution starts?
--
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery