From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 7988 invoked by alias); 9 Oct 2008 23:11:45 -0000 Received: (qmail 6990 invoked by uid 48); 9 Oct 2008 23:10:25 -0000 Date: Thu, 09 Oct 2008 23:11:00 -0000 Message-ID: <20081009231025.6989.qmail@sourceware.org> X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC References: Subject: [Bug driver/37786] Documentation for `-symbolic' needs fixing In-Reply-To: Reply-To: gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org From: "martinrb at google dot com" Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org X-SW-Source: 2008-10/txt/msg00668.txt.bz2 ------- Comment #5 from martinrb at google dot com 2008-10-09 23:10 ------- (In reply to comment #4) > If you want to use a specific linker option, use -Wl,XYZ or -Xlinker XYZ . > Since those are the documented way to pass a linker option via gcc. I know about -Wl, and -Xlinker. I am trying to reduce confusion, for myself in part, but mostly for others. The flag `-Bsymbolic' works (or at least is accepted) despite the fact that it is not documented that such a flag is passed to the linker. This appears to be an undocumented use of `-B'. And on the other hand, the documented flag `-symbolic', which appears to have the same meaning, is rejected. Does this not seem disturbingly confusing? -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37786