code review 152410043: cmd/ld: do not assume that only pe section names start ...

cmd/ld: do not assume that only pe section names start with '.'

Our current pe object reader assumes that every symbol starting with
'.' is section. It appeared to be true, until now gcc 4.9.1 generates
some symbols with '.' at the front. Change that logic to check other
symbol fields in addition to checking for '.'. I am not an expert
here, but it seems reasonable to me.

Added test, but it is only good, if tested with gcc 4.9.1. Otherwise
the test PASSes regardless.

Fixes issue 8811.
Fixes issue 8856.

[brainman, 2014-10-10 00:44:14]

Hello golang-codereviews@googlegroups.com,

I'd like you to review this change to
https://go.googlecode.com/hg/

[brainman, 2014-10-10 00:44:55]

This CL contains some bits from another CL 154210044. I will remove / merge them
once CL 154210044 is submitted.

Alex

[jfrederich, 2014-10-10 06:30:55]

LGTM

[slimsag, 2014-10-10 08:17:31]

Thank you for your prompt work on this.

I will be able to thoroughly test this (with a few different MinGW versions)
sometime tomorrow.

[jfrederich, 2014-10-10 08:22:04]

On 2014/10/10 08:17:31, slimsag wrote:
> Thank you for your prompt work on this.
> 
> I will be able to thoroughly test this (with a few different MinGW versions)
> sometime tomorrow.

I used 4.9.1, 4.9.2 posix seh amd64.

[iant, 2014-10-10 14:47:40]

LGTM

[slimsag, 2014-10-11 02:48:12]

Tested using these MinGW versions and can confirm it fixes 8811:

    x86_64-4.8.3-posix-seh-rt_v3-rev0
    x86_64-4.9.1-posix-seh-rt_v3-rev0

LGTM

[brainman, 2014-10-11 11:01:12]

*** Submitted as https://code.google.com/p/go/source/detail?r=6d6eef8d916b ***

cmd/ld: do not assume that only pe section names start with '.'

Our current pe object reader assumes that every symbol starting with
'.' is section. It appeared to be true, until now gcc 4.9.1 generates
some symbols with '.' at the front. Change that logic to check other
symbol fields in addition to checking for '.'. I am not an expert
here, but it seems reasonable to me.

Added test, but it is only good, if tested with gcc 4.9.1. Otherwise
the test PASSes regardless.

Fixes issue 8811.
Fixes issue 8856.

LGTM=jfrederich, iant, stephen.gutekanst
R=golang-codereviews, jfrederich, stephen.gutekanst, iant
CC=alex.brainman, golang-codereviews
https://codereview.appspot.com/152410043