From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Roland McGrath <roland@frob.com>
To: Nick Clifton <nickc@cygnus.com>
Cc: Philip.Blundell@pobox.com, binutils@sourceware.cygnus.com
Subject: Re: ld and common symbols
Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 15:44:00 -0000
Message-id: <199912212344.SAA02315@frob.com>
References: <199912212150.NAA16520@elmo.cygnus.com>
X-SW-Source: 1999-12/msg00091.html

> I think we would all agree that if t2.c had contained this line:
> 
>   int bar = 2;
> 
> then the linker would have been justified in issueing the error about
> a multiply defined symbol.  I am not sure however, what the concessus
> will be for the correct behaviour in the case you outline above.
> Persoanlly I think the linker is doing the right thing in complaining,
> since bar ought to only be defined and initlaised in one palce, and
> the other files ought to just contain references to it.

Sorry, you are just completely wrong.  This is what common definitions
(i.e. uninitialized C variables) have always done.  Didn't we just cover this?