[RFC] Providing init_fini_syms earlier?

[Carlos O'Donell]

On Wed, Jul 06, 2005 at 09:59:04PM -0700, H. J. Lu wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 07, 2005 at 12:47:19AM -0400, Carlos O'Donell wrote:
> > On Tue, Jul 05, 2005 at 02:34:13PM -0700, H. J. Lu wrote:
> > > On Tue, Jul 05, 2005 at 04:44:37PM -0400, Carlos O'Donell wrote:
> > > > The following:
> > > > http://www.baldric.uwo.ca/~carlos/bug.tar.gz
> > > > 
> > > > Will complain on a bad binutils. 
> > > 
> > > Does it work with a cross linker?
> > 
> > Why do you ask? What do you have in mind?
> 
> If I can reproduce it on Linux/ia32 with a cross linker, I will try
> to take a look.

My pleasure.

http://www.baldric.uwo.ca/~carlos/bug-extraNONE.tar.gz

Contains everything you need to test the bug in a cross link
environment. You will see that two extra R_PARISC_NONE relocs are
emitted, and they correspond to the undefined __init_array_start and
__init_array_end.

If the linker doesn't provide the symbols early enough the bakends can't
do the work of ignoring them? :)

c.