This is the mail archive of the
binutils@sources.redhat.com
mailing list for the binutils project.
Re: next release
On Wed, Jan 24, 2001 at 12:00:05AM +1100, Alan Modra wrote:
> On Sat, 20 Jan 2001, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
>
> > Can anyone approve
> > http://sources.redhat.com/ml/binutils/2000-12/msg00328.html
> > or tell me what's wrong with it? Basically, readelf either does not work at
> > all with symbol versioning (if first vma is large) or shows wrong
> > information from time to time (even with first vma 0).
>
> I noticed an inconsistency in the code printing verdefs. The code you
> trimmed out used
>
> GET_DATA (offset + ivd.vd_aux, evda,
> "version definition aux");
>
> while the code left in uses
>
> GET_DATA (offset - ivd.vd_next + ivd.vd_aux,
> evda, "version def aux");
>
> It looks to me you chose the correct one, but please double check this,
> then check it in.
The latter is correct (offset is incremented by ivd.vd_next in between) and
I think this is the reason why old readelf -a generates different result
than readelf -a with this patch:
The diff between the two outputs contains stuff like:
@@ -9935,7 +9936,7 @@ Version symbols section '.gnu.version' c
038: 0 (*local*) 0 (*local*) 0 (*local*) 0 (*local*)
03c: 0 (*local*) 0 (*local*) 7 (GLIBC_2.2) 2 (GLIBC_2.0)
040: 2 (GLIBC_2.0) 2 (GLIBC_2.0) 2 (GLIBC_2.0) 2 (GLIBC_2.0)
- 044: 2 (GLIBC_2.0) 2 (GLIBC_2.1) 2 (GLIBC_2.0) 2 (GLIBC_2.0)
+ 044: 2 (GLIBC_2.0) 2 (GLIBC_2.0) 2 (GLIBC_2.0) 2 (GLIBC_2.0)
048: 3 (GLIBC_2.1) 3 (GLIBC_2.1) 2 (GLIBC_2.0) 2 (GLIBC_2.0)
04c: 7 (GLIBC_2.2) 2 (GLIBC_2.0) 6 (GLIBC_2.1.3) 3 (GLIBC_2.1)
050: 2 (GLIBC_2.0) 2 (GLIBC_2.0) 2 (GLIBC_2.0) 2 (GLIBC_2.0)
...
(- is readelf without this patch, + with that patch).
Jakub