This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: RFC: Add STB_GNU_SECONDARY
On Fri, Apr 20, 2012 at 3:59 PM, Ian Lance Taylor <email@example.com> wrote:
> "H.J. Lu" <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
>> On Fri, Apr 20, 2012 at 3:10 PM, Cary Coutant <email@example.com> wrote:
>>>> We only have very few bits to in STB_XXX field.
>>> This is exactly why I'm not in favor of this extension. The feature
>>> doesn't seem compelling enough to use up one of these precious
>>> reserved values (in fact, you're using the next-to-last one that's
>>> reserved for OS use).
>>> You want a backup definition? Put a weak def at the end of the link line.
>> It doesn't work for us since the backup definition is
>> always used even if there is a normal definition in
>> a shared library or an archive.
> Can you expand on that? ?How can you refer to the backup definition if
> there is a normal definition?
We need a definition for symbol, foo. Since we don't know if there
is a definition of foo at the final link time. We provide the backup
definition for foo. The backup one is ignored if there is a normal one in
an archive or DSO at link time.