On Thu, May 5, 2016 at 2:31 PM, Rafael Espíndola
<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
