PING: Maintainers of arm-epoc-pe, mcore-unknown-pe, sh-unknown-pe

[Dave Korn]

Kaz Kojima wrote:
> Dave Korn wrote:
>>   Hi!  Does your target support "ld -r"?
> 
> For SH ELF, I think so.

  Ah, sorry; I meant specifically for the PE object format variants.  Subject
line adjusted.

  The reason is that all these targets use the same BFD backend vector for
relocatable and non-relocatable links, and this causes some confusion in the
generated output files.  Fully explained at:

    http://sourceware.org/ml/binutils/2009-02/msg00174.html

  So, when I link a .o file using -r with sh-unknown-pe ld, I see all these
warnings:

/gnu/binutils/obj776-sh-unknown-pe/ld $ /gnu/binutils/obj776-sh-unknown-pe/ld/.
./gas/as-new    -o tmpdir/dump0.o /gnu/binutils/src/ld/testsuite/ld-pe/longsecn.s
/gnu/binutils/obj776-sh-unknown-pe/ld $ ./ld-new
-L/gnu/binutils/src/ld/testsuite/ld-pe  -r -o tmpdir/dump tmpdir/dump0.o
DJ: zero vma section reloc detected: `.text' #0 f=275
DJ: zero vma section reloc detected: `.data' #1 f=291
DJ: zero vma section reloc detected: `.text.very.long.section.name' #4 f=315
DJ: zero vma section reloc detected: `.data$1' #5 f=291
DJ: zero vma section reloc detected: `.rodata$1' #6 f=291
DJ: zero vma section reloc detected: `.data$123' #7 f=291
DJ: zero vma section reloc detected: `.rodata$123' #8 f=291
DJ: zero vma section reloc detected: `.data$123456789' #9 f=291
DJ: zero vma section reloc detected: `.rodata$123456789' #10 f=291
DJ: zero vma section reloc detected: `.data.very.long.section' #11 f=291
DJ: zero vma section reloc detected: `.rodata.very.long.section' #12 f=291
DJ: zero vma section reloc detected: `.data.very.long.section$1' #13 f=291
DJ: zero vma section reloc detected: `.rodata.very.long.section$1' #14 f=291
DJ: zero vma section reloc detected: `.data.very.long.section$1234' #15 f=291
DJ: zero vma section reloc detected: `.rodata.very.long.section$1234' #16 f=291
DJ: zero vma section reloc detected: `.reloc' #3 f=2113795


  The test case .S file is attached.

  Should I be expecting the warnings?  Could it be related to
http://sourceware.org/ml/binutils/2009-02/threads.html#00137
?

    cheers,
      DaveK
-------------- next part --------------
An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed...
Name: longsecn.s
URL: <https://sourceware.org/pipermail/binutils/attachments/20090217/fc519354/attachment.ksh>