From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 69474 invoked by alias); 24 Feb 2016 01:18:22 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gnu-gabi-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: Sender: gnu-gabi-owner@sourceware.org Received: (qmail 68039 invoked by uid 89); 24 Feb 2016 01:18:19 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Checked: by ClamAV 0.99 on sourceware.org X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-2.3 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,FREEMAIL_FROM,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 spammy=Hx-languages-length:421 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.3 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,FREEMAIL_FROM,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.2 (2011-06-06) on sourceware.org X-Spam-Level: X-HELO: mail-qk0-f175.google.com DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=I8So7FmxPqJz1vpAWWwF81UrUYenZSgtWYa0su9glfg=; b=LpCE7ZPRSsQsaciGwwE5ScteYTdEY8a0YSzTy8I0R9uL8HkbvSkpEPanQCwLecSlWr DF7U9gFLmxf1UC0EhuEFMT+aBw0S+6o98GO9tzvEeQB/jadVit05acB1WS9GzBaRPgOq ScYrKcxhnII9QenqwPTozhoGaD6OLJy5JWJl84QWAwPGg0OqJUIfa3EVKkV5gONHgRpe yiF5+wzN1MGIQiSqriPeE/iIpN0rRv0ebqRNnMYu8e1TUnjaq9uAJAMQkyp+lSMN5m+w RvF5+I8YMC3r5VOcpJnuKrtMN7RjjDEZga0ILWjnWRs+veHy4BnEHrSxUA2mMa4EeMHj IS7Q== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=I8So7FmxPqJz1vpAWWwF81UrUYenZSgtWYa0su9glfg=; b=lDMZsquTs+6Nw1J+3Es1sVJnTPECCXO+IU8jEbY9t/pwUJK2f18PSPmn6m9ykKjHrn svG5Cz1iUVAMAlpsrO96XPdD/h9gmghOELQSohowj8OYjbFcE10ipX8E2rd9iqshg1KV r+KRLrVgm/36i7XSDcAVwkIyMQw0YgOol+f0JR9C8fSj2AjR0GIkdvaG3fFQeK47RWIQ vbDy3Of/n6q6bAKE7m9Swgd8+vLyZZ44PtxruaOT8wrkhBSaf4WeQchYdy9Qwjf1bYNA X9PhQ2Va/3KSxzvzIoAVfh+91x9NICPjRcMo79T+GPvLd5graXFPtFzd+hsQzzpzZvNS 19qw== X-Gm-Message-State: AG10YOQRxgp1BWLDXXiYtPHq6KG9Bf78xdNrmwPZH/6MUjT0VpiuYIpdWlZF+rpNcX89FtfZstrX6o3AAnY5bA== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.55.192.89 with SMTP id o86mr22559936qki.31.1456276696775; Tue, 23 Feb 2016 17:18:16 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <20160224010458.GF10657@bubble.grove.modra.org> References: <20160223044029.GE10657@bubble.grove.modra.org> <20160224010458.GF10657@bubble.grove.modra.org> Date: Fri, 01 Jan 2016 00:00:00 -0000 Message-ID: Subject: Re: Specify how undefined weak symbol should be resolved in executable From: "H.J. Lu" To: Alan Modra Cc: Michael Matz , gnu-gabi@sourceware.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-SW-Source: 2016-q1/txt/msg00028.txt.bz2 On Tue, Feb 23, 2016 at 5:04 PM, Alan Modra wrote: > On Tue, Feb 23, 2016 at 09:10:51AM -0800, H.J. Lu wrote: >> At run-time, there is no difference between weak defined and non-weak >> defined symbols. > > This is not true, and even if it was.. > Please do # git grep dl_dynamic_weak in glibc to see it for yourself. -- H.J.