https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17606
mallet at laas dot fr changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|RESOLVED |REOPENED
Resolution|DUPLICATE |---
--- Comment #2 from mallet at laas dot fr ---
I understand bug 17532 is a deliberate fix. However, I was talking more
precisely about using an absolute path name. Traditionaly, absolute paths are
considered as such and do not require any "search path".
I noticed that using an explicit -L/ in front of a -l:/absolute/path.so make it
work, which I find a bit weird. For instance, if there happen to be a
/foo/absolute/path.so, using -L/foo -l:/absolute/path.so would not give the
expected results.
I think that either -l:/absolute/path.so should raise an error, or be treated
as such. What do you think?
--
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
