This is the mail archive of the binutils@sources.redhat.com mailing list for the binutils project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]

Re: How should the GNU linker treat weak references?


On Mon, Jul 02, 2001 at 12:05:05PM -0700, Ulrich Drepper wrote:
> 
> Nope, but I also don't agree with the current behavior.
> 
> What should happen is that the linker recognizes that the undefined
> reference comes from a DSO which was included by DT_NEEDED and in this
> case it should not include a DT_NEEDED in the program itself.
> 

But in Mark's case, it is crtbegin.o contains a weak reference to
__register_frame_info_bases, which has a definition in the shared
libgcc. Do we treat weak reference the same as undefined when dealing
with DT_NEEDED?

> 
> The goal for ld must be to be as close to the ld.so behavior as
> possible to reduce surprises and to not change the user's intentions
> (see point a) above which is something which can truly be
> catastrophic).

Agreed.


H.J.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]