https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18147
--- Comment #4 from Ian Lance Taylor <ian at airs dot com> --- We already explicitly do not report relocation errors for weak undefined symbols. That's because in those cases the relocation overflow is not important. And Cary is right: for any sort of undefined symbol, the relocation overflow is not important. What useful information is the linker conveying? I've already said that I don't care whether the symbol is undefined. It follows that any reference to that symbol can be expected to fail, and I don't care. If I'm going to run the program, I must be using some technique to avoid executing that relocation at all. There's no reason to think that I care about a relocation overflow referring to that symbol any more than I care about any other reference to that symbol. This is not the case of --defsym SYM=0. For that case we certainly should report a relocation overflow. This is a case where I've said I don't care about the symbol at all. (The particular use case here is a program that is determining the types of symbols by linking against libraries that define those symbols and examining the debug info. The libraries can be passed as -l options and there is no need for the tool to replicate the linker's search path. There is also no need to worry about the library dependencies, since they aren't relevant for the purpose of the tool. So it uses --unresolved-symbols=ignore-all.) -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. _______________________________________________ bug-binutils mailing list bug-binutils@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
