This is PR32429.
We did not mention -fPIC in error about producing dynamic relocation
in readonly segment before. Patch changes that.
Differential revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D36874
llvm-svn: 312003
Previous error message style:
error: /home/alice/src/bar.c:12: relocation R_X86_64_PLT32 cannot refer to absolute symbol 'answer' defined in /home/alice/src/foo.o
New error message style:
error: relocation R_X86_64_PLT32 cannot refer to absolute symbol: foo
>>> defined in /home/alice/src/foo.o
>>> referenced by bar.c:12 (/home/alice/src/bar.c:12)
>>> /home/alice/src/bar.o:(.text+0x1)
llvm-svn: 299390
LLD's error messages contain line numbers, function names or section names.
Currently they are formatter as follows.
foo.c (32): symbol 'foo' not found
foo.c (function bar): symbol 'foo' not found
foo.c (.text+0x1234): symbol 'foo' not found
This patch changes them so that they are consistent with Clang's output.
foo.c:32: symbol 'foo' not found
foo.c:(function bar): symbol 'foo' not found
foo.c:(.text+0x1234): symbol 'foo' not found
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D26901
llvm-svn: 287537
Not only symbols (like sections) have names, in case where we
fail to create relocation against such symbol, we should not
print out an empty string, instead we should print a generic
message.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D23731
llvm-svn: 279459
We should always include symbol name when reporting relocations
error to simplify debugging of these issues. Without symbol names
users have to manually investigate which of the libraries contain
invalid relocations which can be cumbersome when linking multiple
libraries.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D23690
llvm-svn: 279162
It was reported in PR28020, that lld does not link code which
gold do. But in fact that is expected behavior as we do not
support DT_TEXTREL.
This patch changes error message as it can report about relocations against
text segments exclusively, other dynamic relocations errors can
be handled separately.
Differential revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D21133
llvm-svn: 272377
We were already checking for non relative relocations.
If we ever decide to add support for rw text segments this means we will
have a single spot to add the flag.
llvm-svn: 268558
George Rimar