From: Alan Modra <amodra@bigpond.net.au>
To: Ulrich Drepper <drepper@redhat.com>
Cc: "H. J. Lu" <hjl@lucon.org>, Richard Henderson <rth@redhat.com>,
binutils@sources.redhat.com
Subject: Re: [RFC] unify dynamic_symbol_p implementations
Date: Tue, 22 Jul 2003 01:18:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20030722011659.GU27145@bubble.sa.bigpond.net.au> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <3F1C766E.3040804@redhat.com>
On Mon, Jul 21, 2003 at 04:25:34PM -0700, Ulrich Drepper wrote:
> H. J. Lu wrote:
> > There were different interpretations of how weak symbols should work
> > and we discussed it at the ia64 psABI meeting. The conclusion was
> > glibc was wrong.
>
> glibc was not wrong (please is impossible given the behavior is
> unspecified). But coming to a common, reasonable semantics made more
> sense with glibc's behavior changing (Irix would be effected, too, if
> they would make such a change).
Has someone written up a draft psABI that defines weak symbol behaviour?
Or better, a draft gABI? gABI on www.caldera.com is still 24 April 2001.
Also, if ld follows the new semantics, which versions of glibc will no
longer build? Not that this should deter us from changing ld, but we'd
need to mention in release notes that older versions of glibc require
older versions of binutils.
--
Alan Modra
IBM OzLabs - Linux Technology Centre
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2003-07-22 1:18 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 31+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2003-07-18 19:02 Bob Wilson
2003-07-18 19:57 ` Richard Henderson
2003-07-18 20:09 ` Bob Wilson
2003-07-18 20:56 ` Richard Henderson
2003-07-18 21:19 ` Bob Wilson
2003-07-18 22:02 ` Richard Henderson
2003-07-18 22:06 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2003-07-18 22:16 ` Bob Wilson
2003-07-18 22:21 ` Richard Henderson
2003-07-19 2:46 ` H. J. Lu
2003-07-19 4:13 ` H. J. Lu
2003-07-19 4:48 ` H. J. Lu
2003-07-19 5:57 ` Alan Modra
2003-07-19 6:21 ` H. J. Lu
2003-07-20 15:13 ` Alan Modra
2003-07-20 15:26 ` H. J. Lu
2003-07-21 0:24 ` Alan Modra
2003-07-21 3:18 ` H. J. Lu
2003-07-21 19:28 ` H. J. Lu
2003-07-21 20:48 ` Richard Henderson
2003-07-21 21:04 ` H. J. Lu
2003-07-21 23:26 ` Ulrich Drepper
2003-07-22 1:18 ` Alan Modra [this message]
2003-07-22 3:37 ` Ulrich Drepper
2003-07-24 0:23 ` Bob Wilson
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2003-07-16 23:47 Richard Henderson
2003-07-17 13:22 ` Alan Modra
2003-07-17 16:28 ` Richard Henderson
2003-07-17 19:28 ` H. J. Lu
2003-07-17 21:18 ` Hans-Peter Nilsson
2003-07-18 21:05 ` Richard Henderson
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20030722011659.GU27145@bubble.sa.bigpond.net.au \
--to=amodra@bigpond.net.au \
--cc=binutils@sources.redhat.com \
--cc=drepper@redhat.com \
--cc=hjl@lucon.org \
--cc=rth@redhat.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).