This is the mail archive of the
binutils@sourceware.org
mailing list for the binutils project.
Re: new warning with 2.19
- From: Ralf Corsepius <ralf dot corsepius at rtems dot org>
- To: Alan Modra <amodra at bigpond dot net dot au>
- Cc: Joel Sherrill <joel dot sherrill at oarcorp dot com>, "binutils at sourceware dot org" <binutils at sourceware dot org>
- Date: Thu, 04 Dec 2008 08:39:30 +0100
- Subject: Re: new warning with 2.19
- References: <493695A1.9080502@oarcorp.com> <20081203215620.GC9361@bubble.grove.modra.org>
On Thu, 2008-12-04 at 08:26 +1030, Alan Modra wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 03, 2008 at 08:20:17AM -0600, Joel Sherrill wrote:
> > warning: cannot find entry symbol _start; defaulting to 00000000
> [snip]
> > Is there something wrong with the check that generates
> > this warning?
>
> I doubt it.
Well, I don't know if there might be something wrong, but there
definitely is some behavioral change in ld:
Using identical *.o's, ld is emitting the warning with binutils-2.19 and
doesn't with binutils-2.18 (This is the actual case triggering this
warning in RTEMS):
# /opt/rtems-4.9/bin/sparc-rtems4.9-ld
-dc -dp -N -e start -o cache.rel -L../../../../.././erc32/lib
-L/opt/rtems-4.9/lib64/gcc/sparc-rtems4.9/4.3.2
-L/opt/rtems-4.9/lib64/gcc/sparc-rtems4.9/4.3.2/../../../../sparc-rtems4.10/lib -r cache/cache_rel-cache.o ../shared/src/cache_rel-cache_aligned_malloc.o ../shared/src/cache_rel-cache_manager.o -v
GNU ld (GNU Binutils) 2.18
# /opt/rtems-4.10/bin/sparc-rtems4.10-ld
-dc -dp -N -e start -o cache.rel
-L../../../../.././erc32/lib
-L/opt/rtems-4.10/lib64/gcc/sparc-rtems4.10/4.3.2
-L/opt/rtems-4.10/lib64/gcc/sparc-rtems4.10/4.3.2/../../../../sparc-rtems4.10/lib -r cache/cache_rel-cache.o ../shared/src/cache_rel-cache_aligned_malloc.o ../shared/src/cache_rel-cache_manager.o -v
GNU ld (GNU Binutils) 2.19
/opt/rtems-4.10/bin/sparc-rtems4.10-ld: warning: cannot find entry
symbol start; defaulting to 0000000000000000
To me, the questions are
* Is the call to ld triggering the warning correct?
* Which ld's behavior is right? Is the warning bogus?
Ralf