1.1 --- a/patches/binutils/2.15.90.0.3/binutils-20040820-duplicates.patch Tue Aug 14 19:32:22 2007 +0000
1.2 +++ /dev/null Thu Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 +0000
1.3 @@ -1,74 +0,0 @@
1.4 -See http://sources.redhat.com/ml/binutils/2004-08/msg00256.html
1.5 -
1.6 -Date: Fri, 20 Aug 2004 21:13:43 -0400
1.7 -From: Daniel Jacobowitz <drow at false dot org>
1.8 -To: binutils at sources dot redhat dot com
1.9 -Subject: Re: Handle SEC_LINK_DUPLICATES_SAME_CONTENTS for arm-linux
1.10 -Message-ID: <20040821011342.GA30319@nevyn.them.org>
1.11 -Mail-Followup-To: binutils at sources dot redhat dot com
1.12 -References: <20040818145518.GA9774@nevyn.them.org> <20040819055040.GA11820@lucon.org> <20040819080034.GE21716@bubble.modra.org> <20040820173240.GA17678@nevyn.them.org> <20040821003737.GB16016@bubble.modra.org>
1.13 -In-Reply-To: <20040821003737 dot GB16016 at bubble dot modra dot org>
1.14 -
1.15 -On Sat, Aug 21, 2004 at 10:07:38AM +0930, Alan Modra wrote:
1.16 -> On Fri, Aug 20, 2004 at 01:32:40PM -0400, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
1.17 -> > Thanks. How's this?
1.18 ->
1.19 -> As you might have guessed from my rather slack review of your previous
1.20 -> patch, I trust you enough to give the OK without proper review. But
1.21 -> since you asked... :)
1.22 -
1.23 -Checked in as so.
1.24 -
1.25 ---
1.26 -Daniel Jacobowitz
1.27 -
1.28 -2004-08-20 Daniel Jacobowitz <dan@debian.org>
1.29 -
1.30 - * elflink.c (_bfd_elf_section_already_linked): Handle
1.31 - SEC_LINK_DUPLICATES_SAME_CONTENTS.
1.32 -
1.33 -Index: elflink.c
1.34 -===================================================================
1.35 -RCS file: /big/fsf/rsync/src-cvs/src/bfd/elflink.c,v
1.36 -retrieving revision 1.97
1.37 -diff -u -p -r1.97 elflink.c
1.38 ---- binutils/bfd/elflink.c 18 Aug 2004 02:45:42 -0000 1.97
1.39 -+++ binutils/bfd/elflink.c 21 Aug 2004 00:59:08 -0000
1.40 -@@ -9366,6 +9366,36 @@ _bfd_elf_section_already_linked (bfd *ab
1.41 - (_("%B: duplicate section `%A' has different size\n"),
1.42 - abfd, sec);
1.43 - break;
1.44 -+
1.45 -+ case SEC_LINK_DUPLICATES_SAME_CONTENTS:
1.46 -+ if (sec->size != l->sec->size)
1.47 -+ (*_bfd_error_handler)
1.48 -+ (_("%B: duplicate section `%A' has different size\n"),
1.49 -+ abfd, sec);
1.50 -+ else if (sec->size != 0)
1.51 -+ {
1.52 -+ bfd_byte *sec_contents, *l_sec_contents;
1.53 -+
1.54 -+ if (!bfd_malloc_and_get_section (abfd, sec, &sec_contents))
1.55 -+ (*_bfd_error_handler)
1.56 -+ (_("%B: warning: could not read contents of section `%A'\n"),
1.57 -+ abfd, sec);
1.58 -+ else if (!bfd_malloc_and_get_section (l->sec->owner, l->sec,
1.59 -+ &l_sec_contents))
1.60 -+ (*_bfd_error_handler)
1.61 -+ (_("%B: warning: could not read contents of section `%A'\n"),
1.62 -+ l->sec->owner, l->sec);
1.63 -+ else if (memcmp (sec_contents, l_sec_contents, sec->size) != 0)
1.64 -+ (*_bfd_error_handler)
1.65 -+ (_("%B: warning: duplicate section `%A' has different contents\n"),
1.66 -+ abfd, sec);
1.67 -+
1.68 -+ if (sec_contents)
1.69 -+ free (sec_contents);
1.70 -+ if (l_sec_contents)
1.71 -+ free (l_sec_contents);
1.72 -+ }
1.73 -+ break;
1.74 - }
1.75 -
1.76 - /* Set the output_section field so that lang_add_section
1.77 -