http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=12496
--- Comment #11 from H.J. Lu <hjl.tools at gmail dot com> 2011-02-24 16:58:43 UTC --- (In reply to comment #10) > Yes, ld.gold and ld.dk silently use non-LTO part of div.o; it's a bug. > However, > I don't think that an undefined reference error is not a bug. > > 1. The testcase compiles well without -flto or with -fno-use-linker-plugin. > 2. Imagine a bare-metal program, such as a kernel. When building it, the > standard C library is not used, and compiler-generated calls to memcmp, etc. > are resolved within the program itself. To work around the bug, a library with > these functions must be compiled without -flto. I think it is the correct behavior since the LTO version of the function isn't used anyway. > Again, an unpleasant thing is that the order of linking with LTO differ from > one without LTO, and linkers disagree with each other on this matter. > > P.S.: Will ld.hjl be obsoleted by ld.dk? If yes, perhaps fixing it does not > worth a trouble... It depends. ld.dk has the same bug as gold. -- Configure bugmail: http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. _______________________________________________ bug-binutils mailing list bug-binutils@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
