[PATCH] GCC compatibility: pass -z linker options to the linker

[Eric Christopher]

On Tue, Jul 15, 2014 at 4:57 PM, Joerg Sonnenberger
<joerg at britannica.bec.de> wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 15, 2014 at 03:11:23PM -0700, Eric Christopher wrote:
>> I'm sorry Joerg, you've got sufficient people disagreeing with you
>> here and this is a fairly well established option in gcc that we're
>> just getting compatibility with here. A warning would be both annoying
>> for users and pointless. I'm going to go ahead and have the patch
>> submitted.
>
> How is -z well established when it wasn't even documented? GCC passing
> unknown flags to the linker is a misfeature. Warning about it is the
> very least we should do. While it might be too late for -u, no new
> option should be added to this list. That said, I would like to see a
> sane use case for -u, independent of whether it should be warned about
> or not. I tried to use it in the past and it didn't do the things I
> expected from it.
>

-z has been silently passed along to the linker as long as I can tell
(r262) in gcc. At least as long the gcc.c file has existed. That it
wasn't documented well, you can blame at least this patch:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
r262 | rms | 1992-01-31 21:15:32 -0800 (Fri, 31 Jan 1992) | 2 lines

Initial revision

------------------------------------------------------------------------

At which point... I don't think it matters. It's been passed along
roughly forever and I really don't think it's something we should care
enough to warn about.

-eric