https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16345
--- Comment #7 from Alexey Neyman <stilor at att dot net> --- (In reply to H.J. Lu from comment #6) > > Also, I think, a mention in the description of -r option in ld.info would be > > appropriate. > > .init section can only be used according to the gABI. It is irrelevant > to ld -r. When in doubt, DON't USE special sections documented in the > gABI for your own purpose. The .text section is also listed as a "special section" in gABI/LSB, yet you suggested to use it: ---- Special Sections ... .init This section holds executable instructions that contribute to the process initialization code. When a program starts to run, the system arranges to execute the code in this section before calling the main program entry point (called main for C programs). ... .text This section holds the ``text,'' or executable instructions, of a program. ---- I don't see how putting startup code in .init in a freestanding environment contradicts the usage described by gABI, nor why a presense of the .init section in any of the input objects should affect the relocation order in .text section. Could you explain why you think the test case is not compliant to gABI? Especially, the second version with the empty .init section? -- 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
