copy_private_bfd_data in bfd/elf.c question

[Steve Ellcey]

> Note to Steve: -l not -I !  I was curious as to whether the segment
> map changed.  If it didn't then no matter.

Oops, I guess I need a better font in my mailer.  It looks like the
segment map did change, at least a little, ".bortext" is missing from
segment 04 and .note is missing from 08.  I have no idea what this
means, I don't recall ever seeing a .bortext section before.

Old (pre-strip):

 Section to Segment mapping:
  Segment Sections...
   00
   01     .IA_64.unwind_hdr .IA_64.unwind .IA_64.unwind_info
   02     .interp
   03     .dynamic
   04     .dynamic .dynsym .dynstr .hash .rela.plt .IA_64.unwind_hdr .IA_64.unwind .IA_64.unwind_info .rodata .interp .dynhash .text .bortext
   05     .plt .dlt .sbss .bss
   06
   07
   08     .note
   09

New (after running strip):

 Section to Segment mapping:
  Segment Sections...
   00
   01     .IA_64.unwind_hdr .IA_64.unwind .IA_64.unwind_info
   02     .interp
   03     .dynamic
   04     .dynamic .dynsym .dynstr .hash .rela.plt .IA_64.unwind_hdr .IA_64.unwind .IA_64.unwind_info .rodata .interp .dynhash .text
   05     .plt .dlt .sbss .bss
   06
   07
   08
   09