Compiling glibc-2.3.2 (-2.3.3?) snapshot 20031115 with gcc-3.4 snapshot 20031119

[Gabriel Dos Reis]

Daniel Jacobowitz <drow@mvista.com> writes:

[...]

| > to behave differently than
| >    int foo (void) __attribute__((visibility ("hidden")));
| >    int foo (void) { return 137; }?
| > 
| > (I hope the answer is no, and that default is just default.  I know
| > how to make the compiler treat the two kinds of default differently,
| > but it'll be a little more expensive and convoluted.)
| 
| But... wouldn't this be necessary if there was a switch to change the
| "default" visibility of compiler-generated symbols?  Something which
| has been both requested and proposed in the past.

My  instinct asnwer would be: Please don't multiply switches for those
things, we've got so many switches that are  not consistently tested
that I'm nervous about adding more.

-- Gaby