If this is something that GCC doesn't have, it would be nice if we put something in our own docs about it (something like docs/UsersManual.rst).
On Thu, May 5, 2016 at 2:34 PM, Sriraman Tallam via cfe-commits < cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org> wrote: > On Thu, May 5, 2016 at 2:31 PM, Rafael EspĂndola > <rafael.espind...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Is there a gcc option or they just assume they are targeting the > > linker that was around when gcc was built? > > It is done at configure time, the linker is checked for copy > relocations support. I recently saw a request to replace this with a > flag like -mpiecopyrelocs. I chatted off-line with Reid about this > and a flag was suggested. > > > > > > >> + if (Args.hasFlag(options::OPT_mpiecopyrelocs, > options::OPT_mno_piecopyrelocs, > >> + false)) { > >> + CmdArgs.push_back("-piecopyrelocs"); > >> + } > > > > you don't need the {} > > > >> +def piecopyrelocs : Flag<["-"], "piecopyrelocs">, > >> + HelpText<"Linker copy relocations support when linking as PIE">; > > > > I think you are missing a verb: Linker copy relocations *are* supported. > > > > But how about just "Position independent executables can have copy > relocations"? > > > > Cheers, > > Rafael > _______________________________________________ > cfe-commits mailing list > cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org > http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits >
_______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits