summaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
path: root/sources/binutils/2.15.91.0.2/701-binutils-dup-sections.patch
diff options
context:
space:
mode:
Diffstat (limited to 'sources/binutils/2.15.91.0.2/701-binutils-dup-sections.patch')
-rw-r--r--sources/binutils/2.15.91.0.2/701-binutils-dup-sections.patch68
1 files changed, 0 insertions, 68 deletions
diff --git a/sources/binutils/2.15.91.0.2/701-binutils-dup-sections.patch b/sources/binutils/2.15.91.0.2/701-binutils-dup-sections.patch
deleted file mode 100644
index 4e4934d8c..000000000
--- a/sources/binutils/2.15.91.0.2/701-binutils-dup-sections.patch
+++ /dev/null
@@ -1,68 +0,0 @@
-See http://sources.redhat.com/ml/binutils/2004-08/msg00256.html
-
-Date: Fri, 20 Aug 2004 21:13:43 -0400
-From: Daniel Jacobowitz <drow at false dot org>
-To: binutils at sources dot redhat dot com
-Subject: Re: Handle SEC_LINK_DUPLICATES_SAME_CONTENTS for arm-linux
-Message-ID: <20040821011342.GA30319@nevyn.them.org>
-Mail-Followup-To: binutils at sources dot redhat dot com
-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>
-In-Reply-To: <20040821003737 dot GB16016 at bubble dot modra dot org>
-
-On Sat, Aug 21, 2004 at 10:07:38AM +0930, Alan Modra wrote:
-> On Fri, Aug 20, 2004 at 01:32:40PM -0400, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
-> > Thanks. How's this?
->
-> As you might have guessed from my rather slack review of your previous
-> patch, I trust you enough to give the OK without proper review. But
-> since you asked... :)
-
-Checked in as so.
-
---
-Daniel Jacobowitz
-
-[ rediffed against binutils-2.15.91.0.2, with some elbow grease ]
-
-2004-08-20 Daniel Jacobowitz <dan@debian.org>
-
- * elflink.c (_bfd_elf_section_already_linked): Handle
- SEC_LINK_DUPLICATES_SAME_CONTENTS.
---- binutils-2.15.91.0.2/bfd/elflink.c.old 2004-07-27 21:36:08.000000000 -0700
-+++ binutils-2.15.91.0.2/bfd/elflink.c 2004-08-26 06:38:07.000000000 -0700
-@@ -9359,6 +9359,35 @@
- (_("%s: %s: warning: duplicate section `%s' has different size\n"),
- bfd_archive_filename (abfd), name);
- break;
-+ case SEC_LINK_DUPLICATES_SAME_CONTENTS:
-+ if (sec->size != l->sec->size)
-+ (*_bfd_error_handler)
-+ (_("%B: duplicate section `%A' has different size\n"),
-+ bfd_archive_filename (abfd), sec);
-+ else if (sec->size != 0)
-+ {
-+ bfd_byte *sec_contents, *l_sec_contents;
-+
-+ if (!bfd_malloc_and_get_section (abfd, sec, &sec_contents))
-+ (*_bfd_error_handler)
-+ (_("%B: warning: could not read contents of section `%A'\n"),
-+ bfd_archive_filename (abfd), sec);
-+ else if (!bfd_malloc_and_get_section (l->sec->owner, l->sec,
-+ &l_sec_contents))
-+ (*_bfd_error_handler)
-+ (_("%B: warning: could not read contents of section `%A'\n"),
-+ bfd_archive_filename(l->sec->owner), l->sec);
-+ else if (memcmp (sec_contents, l_sec_contents, sec->size) != 0)
-+ (*_bfd_error_handler)
-+ (_("%B: warning: duplicate section `%A' has different contents\n"),
-+ bfd_archive_filename (abfd), sec);
-+
-+ if (sec_contents)
-+ free (sec_contents);
-+ if (l_sec_contents)
-+ free (l_sec_contents);
-+ }
-+ break;
- }
-
- /* Set the output_section field so that lang_add_section