https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65248
--- Comment #12 from jb999 at gmx dot de --- Yes, that's why I'm using binutils 2.25.1 to link firefox. I was just wondering whether binutils >= 2.26 and gcc 4.9.3 might cause harm. >From what I understand will binutils >= 2.26 with gcc 4.9.3 alert you by causing a link error whereas binutils < 2.26 will link the way it has been done for all these years (trusting that neither the shared library nor the executable updates its copy). So binutils >= 2.26 isn't broken for older gcc, it's just drawing attention to a possible problem. Is that right?
