This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: multiple definitions of 'xxx keyed to...' in egcs-1.1.1
- To: law at cygnus dot com
- Subject: Re: multiple definitions of 'xxx keyed to...' in egcs-1.1.1
- From: Zack Weinberg <zack at rabi dot columbia dot edu>
- Date: Sat, 20 Feb 1999 16:35:24 -0500
- cc: jason at cygnus dot com (Jason Merrill), egcs at egcs dot cygnus dot com
On Sat, 20 Feb 1999 14:27:02 -0700, Jeffrey A Law wrote:
>
> In message <199902202057.PAA22565@blastula.phys.columbia.edu>you write:
> > I don't really see using local symbols for constructors as an
> > ELF-specific hack. HJ's implementation may be ELF-specific, but we
> > ought to be able to use the same tactic on any system with named
> > sections - at least XCOFF, and I know there are others.
>Huh? Just because a target has named sections does not mean it has functional
>init/fini support. Doesn't making the ctors/dtors static depend on functional
>init/fini support, particularly for shared libraries?
Yes, but I thought that all it takes to have functional init/fini was
named sections and a sensible dynamic linker. I don't claim to know
this issue inside out, but I do know there used to be plenty of
targets for which basic ctors and dtors would work without collect2,
which meant they had functional init/fini - right?
zw