This is the mail archive of the
cygwin-talk
mailing list for the cygwin project.
FW: PATCH: PR ld/4409: --unresolved-symbols=ignore-all issues on ia64
- From: "Dave Korn" <dave dot korn at artimi dot com>
- To: "Thread TITTTL'd!" <cygwin-talk at cygwin dot com>
- Date: Tue, 3 Jul 2007 19:50:00 +0100
- Subject: FW: PATCH: PR ld/4409: --unresolved-symbols=ignore-all issues on ia64
- Reply-to: The Cygwin-Talk Maiming List <cygwin-talk at cygwin dot com>
Shame there isn't a binutils-talk list, so I'll just have to say it here
instead....
On 03 July 2007 19:42, H.J. Lu wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 03, 2007 at 11:32:57AM -0700, Eric Christopher wrote:
>>
>> On Jul 3, 2007, at 11:29 AM, Andreas Schwab wrote:
>>
>>> "H.J. Lu" writes:
>>>
>>>> Now the question is what linker should do when 2 exclusive options, like:
>>>>
>>>> -shared, -Bshareable Create a shared library
>>>> -pie, --pic-executable Create a position independent executable
>>>>
>>>> are given at the same time. Linker can issue an error or let the
>>>> last one wins. I am OK with either choice. What do people perfer?
>>>> Whatever we do, we should be consistent.
>>>
>>> In gcc -shared wins over -pie.
>>
>> And that's definitely what we should do.
>
> Where is it documented. Gcc 4.3 just passes "-shared -pie" to
> linker. I don't see gcc driver remove -pie.
>
>
> H.J.
This thread has been driving me mad for the past day or two, because I can't
read a single post from it without hearing Eric Cartman's voice in my head,
saying "No! Bad kitteh! You can't share my pie! No shared pie!"
cheers,
DaveK
--
Can't think of a witty .sigline today....