Re: bfd cleanups

[Thiemo Seufer <ica2_ts at csv dot ica dot uni-stuttgart dot de>]

Richard Sandiford wrote:
> Thiemo Seufer <ica2_ts@csv.ica.uni-stuttgart.de> writes:
> >> @@ -8187,47 +8092,6 @@ _bfd_mips_elf_final_link (bfd *abfd, str
[snip]
> > Richard, is this code obsolete for IRIX?
> 
> Well, PT_MIPS_REGINFO is supposed to be mandatory in 32-bit objects
> and DT_MIPS_OPTIONS is mandatory in NewABI objects, so I can see why
> the status quo makes sense for IRIX.  I certainly don't know of any
> reason why we'd want to re-enable the code.
> 
> The comment for the first hunk claims that we don't merge .reginfo
> correctly, but I think we try to do that in _bfd_mips_elf_final_link,
> so maybe it's simply out of date.  I think that bit can probably go.
> 
> On the other hand, I suppose the second hunk is one of those cases where
> the #if 0'd code is acting as commentary.  "We don't merge .MIPS.options
> sections correctly, but it doesn't seem to matter, and we've decided to
> keep the section anyway."  (Note that the comment is saying what we
> do now, not what would happen if we re-enable the code.)  No opinion
> either way on whether it's worth keeping.

Well, then I'm in favour of removing that hunk.


Thiemo