Re: ld using .. in search paths

[Bryan Ischo <bryan at ischo dot com>]

On 09/02/11 15:52, Alan Modra wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 31, 2011 at 11:59:47AM -0700, Bryan Ischo wrote:
> > OK I know this is likely to be a completely irrelevant issue for
> > most people but I recently experience a very puzzling problem that
> > ended up to be due to ld's use of '..' in its search paths.
> I think you are blaming the wrong program.  If ld is told via -L to
> search a patch containing ".." then it should do exactly that.
> Consider
>    ln -s . foo
>    ls foo/..
>
> "foo/.." above is not the same as "."

Thank you for your response.  I am not sure exactly what the source of 
the /../ paths was, I had assumed that it was a built-in search path in 
ld, but maybe it was gcc passing -L arguments and it's gcc's doing.

In any case, would it be sensible for the program generating the search 
paths to look in both the collapsed and un-collapsed forms of the path, 
to cover both bases?

Thanks,
Bryan