From owner-mint@fishpool.com  Tue Apr  8 16:16:54 2003
Date: Tue, 8 Apr 2003 16:14:10 +0200 (CEST)
From: Standa Opichal <opichals@seznam.cz>
X-X-Sender: stop@mail.idoox.com
To: Frank Naumann <fnaumann@cs.uni-magdeburg.de>
cc: mint@fishpool.com
Subject: Re: [MiNT] ld problems
In-Reply-To: <Pine.NEB.4.44.0304081244470.16114-100000@wh58-508.st.uni-magdeburg.de>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0304081612040.8504-100000@mail.idoox.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
X-Virus-Scanned: by AMaViS
Delivered-To: mint@fishpool.com
Delivered-To: mint@lists.fishpool.fi
X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0
Sender: mint-bounce@lists.fishpool.fi
Errors-to: mint-bounce@lists.fishpool.fi
X-original-sender: opichals@seznam.cz
Precedence: bulk
List-help: <mailto:ecartis@lists.fishpool.fi?Subject=help>
List-unsubscribe: <mailto:mint-request@lists.fishpool.fi?Subject=unsubscribe>
List-ID: <mint.lists.fishpool.fi>
X-List-ID: <mint.lists.fishpool.fi>

Hi!

I've done some more tests on that...:

On Tue, 8 Apr 2003, Frank Naumann wrote:

> Hello!
> 
> > Is there a debug version of the gcc package somewhere (to get it possibly
> > fixed)? Or does the workaroung exist?
> >
> > The linkage there is like:
> > ld -o p1.o s1.o s2.o
> > ld -o p2.o s3.o s4.o
> >
> > the critical one merges the two above into one... (is it legal? anyway it
> > works on Linux here /gcc 2.96/).
> > ld -o result.o p1.o p2.o
> 
> Does it work if you link all object files (without the merge and without
> the -r option)?

Yes, it works if I link the files directly (no submerges) all at once.
Like the following: ld -o result.o s1.o s2.o s3.o s4.o

> Do you use the binutils 2.9 or 2.13?

Both versions behaves the same way :(

regards

STan