This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: A Linux/libc 5 patch for egcs 1.1.2
- To: law at cygnus dot com
- Subject: Re: A Linux/libc 5 patch for egcs 1.1.2
- From: "H.J. Lu" <hjl at varesearch dot com>
- Date: Thu, 04 Mar 1999 10:53:49 -0800
- CC: Ulrich Drepper <drepper at cygnus dot com>, egcs-patches at egcs dot cygnus dot com
- References: <email@example.com>
Jeffrey A Law wrote:
> In message <m10HtKT-000AUZC@shanghai.varesearch.com>you write:
> > The connection to lucon.org has been down for 5 days now. If you need
> > a reply, please send to firstname.lastname@example.org for now.
> Thanks. Will do.
> > As I said, libio is very tricky. If you take a look at
> > libio/config/linuxlibc1.mt, you will find this:
> > IO_OBJECTS=iogetc.o ioputc.o iofeof.o ioferror.o \
> > filedoalloc.o fileops.o genops.o iofclose.o \
> > iovsprintf.o iovsscanf.o strops.o iogetline.o
> > That means other C files in libio are not included. We don't care those
> > weak aliases in files which are not in libstdc++. BTW, you won't get
> > those weak aliases on any other systems, except for Linux.
> OK. Thanks for the explanation.
> So I see iogetline.o in both linux.mt and linuxlibc1.mt, but no weak
> defs in it. libc-5.46 defines _IO_getline.
> Similarly we don't use weak symbols in filedoalloc, fileops and strops, but
> they define functions which are also found in libc.a for libc-5.46.
That is ok as long as the one file in libio from egcs has more symbols
than the same file in libc 5.4.46.
> So, is there some reason why we don't have weak definitions for functions
> in those files?
The weak aliases are mainly used to provide the standard stdio functions
in such a way that user can override them while libc still works.