From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gnu-gabi-return-38-listarch-gnu-gabi=sourceware.org@sourceware.org>
Received: (qmail 15981 invoked by alias); 24 Feb 2016 17:54:38 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gnu-gabi-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gnu-gabi.sourceware.org>
List-Post: <mailto:gnu-gabi@sourceware.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gnu-gabi-help@sourceware.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gnu-gabi-subscribe@sourceware.org>
Sender: gnu-gabi-owner@sourceware.org
Received: (qmail 15965 invoked by uid 89); 24 Feb 2016 17:54:38 -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=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 spammy=hpux
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,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: mx2.suse.de
X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at test-mx.suse.de
Date: Fri, 01 Jan 2016 00:00:00 -0000
From: Michael Matz <matz@suse.de>
To: "H.J. Lu" <hjl.tools@gmail.com>
cc: Carlos O'Donell <carlos@redhat.com>, Alan Modra <amodra@gmail.com>, 
    gnu-gabi@sourceware.org
Subject: Re: Specify how undefined weak symbol should be resolved in
 executable
In-Reply-To: <CAMe9rOrBif7TL2QhGC4mmQhdZ-YM48V6r-71VX5k4JOmNgurGg@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <alpine.LSU.2.20.1602241851010.20277@wotan.suse.de>
References: <CAMe9rOoqOvXXOjLKnyg0OPpPE4pEvN4kO6+e7nWz7Ng9LTBwSg@mail.gmail.com> <20160223044029.GE10657@bubble.grove.modra.org> <CAMe9rOokycUczJ-F8rafSoTygz0emiCUHz3FwVObCf=HPun=ew@mail.gmail.com> <alpine.LSU.2.20.1602231748430.20277@wotan.suse.de>
 <CAMe9rOrFK5+AQJ1RepMD_R3Kw+s5Yg3k8C-PEmMTt1MtC3tKng@mail.gmail.com> <alpine.LSU.2.20.1602231756490.20277@wotan.suse.de> <CAMe9rOpQ4Fwk7wJNQuW_5VFuZTApuixt5e=NdrUmZccYK17cCg@mail.gmail.com> <20160224010458.GF10657@bubble.grove.modra.org>
 <CAMe9rOpHGzJ--5gTucEsfrJtG5kDVyS8nUjc3P+XbpKXA+Ez4w@mail.gmail.com> <20160224015659.GH10657@bubble.grove.modra.org> <56CD0FC8.4030202@redhat.com> <CAMe9rOqnfqM_jriQiF4v4OZ0309nHP5mNbz3PZbHs7WGrqhNJQ@mail.gmail.com> <alpine.LSU.2.20.1602241628540.20277@wotan.suse.de>
 <CAMe9rOo24H0_Rw0fQAzW+bs+xQvjT+vjqS-X10JyovowcLuhBA@mail.gmail.com> <alpine.LSU.2.20.1602241801070.20277@wotan.suse.de> <CAMe9rOrBif7TL2QhGC4mmQhdZ-YM48V6r-71VX5k4JOmNgurGg@mail.gmail.com>
User-Agent: Alpine 2.20 (LSU 67 2015-01-07)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
X-SW-Source: 2016-q1/txt/msg00036.txt.bz2

Hi,

On Wed, 24 Feb 2016, H.J. Lu wrote:

> > To not do that (i.e. resolve them always at link edit time) breaks 
> > various current uses of weak symbols.  We could do that of course, but 
> > I don't think that would be useful to users.
> 
> I suggest you raise this issue at
> 
> https://groups.google.com/forum/#!forum/generic-abi

You want to change existing behaviour, not me.  The Solaris and HP-UX guys 
already stated what they do, and are unlikely to want to change behaviour.  
I don't think we can change the gABI to be more explicit about weak 
symbols (not the least because Solaris and HP-UX already differ in the 
details), so I think we're left with discussing it here.


Ciao,
Michael.