This is the mail archive of the libc-alpha@sourceware.org mailing list for the glibc project.

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format:	[Raw text]

Re: [PATCH] Implement x86 SIZE32/SIZE64 relocations

From: David Miller <davem at davemloft dot net>
To: roland at hack dot frob dot com
Cc: hjl dot tools at gmail dot com, aj at suse dot com, libc-alpha at sourceware dot org
Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2013 15:42:06 -0500 (EST)
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Implement x86 SIZE32/SIZE64 relocations
References: <20130116202029.641B32C0C3@topped-with-meat.com><CAMe9rOo-k0FScCzbN_o_d+rNwWb8tD+Q-WV2C5f9DxSTKfxQpw@mail.gmail.com><20130116203321.7715D2C0C3@topped-with-meat.com>

From: Roland McGrath <roland@hack.frob.com>
Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2013 12:33:21 -0800 (PST)

> If it's so well settled, then you can commit the changes to binutils and
> report here that they are in binutils already when you propose your patch.

I strongly disagree with this ordering requirement.

The whole world is not binutils, there are many tool sets that might
want to emit these ABI standard defined relocations.  The most
important dependency is the dynamic linker, and it should support
all cpu ABI defined relocations regardless of whatever binutils can
emit it or not.

Follow-Ups:
- Re: [PATCH] Implement x86 SIZE32/SIZE64 relocations
  - From: Carlos O'Donell

References:
- Re: [PATCH] Implement x86 SIZE32/SIZE64 relocations
  - From: Roland McGrath
- Re: [PATCH] Implement x86 SIZE32/SIZE64 relocations
  - From: H.J. Lu
- Re: [PATCH] Implement x86 SIZE32/SIZE64 relocations
  - From: Roland McGrath

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]