This is the mail archive of the
binutils@sources.redhat.com
mailing list for the binutils project.
Re: ld bug?
On Tue, Oct 30, 2001 at 11:33:09PM -0800, H . J . Lu wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 30, 2001 at 11:30:13PM -0800, H . J . Lu wrote:
> > On Tue, Oct 30, 2001 at 01:36:04AM +0300, Vassili Karpov wrote:
> > > LD discards ELF visibility attributes when making relocateable objects.
> > >
> > > Example:
> > > a.s
> > > ==
> > > .protected symbol
> > >
> > > b.s
> > > ==
> > > dummy:
> > > ---
> > > as -o a.o a.s
> > > as -o b.o b.s
> > > ld -r -o c.o a.o b.o
> > >
> > > a.o: 4: 00000000 0 NOTYPE GLOBAL PROTECTED UND symbol
> > > c.o: 8: 00000000 0 NOTYPE GLOBAL DEFAULT UND symbol
> > > --
> >
> > It is ok since symbol is undefined. There is no such a thing as
> > protected, undefined symbol.
>
> I take it back. It is a bug. I will fix it.
>
>
Here it is.
H.J.
---
2001-10-30 H.J. Lu <hjl@gnu.org>
* elflink.h (elf_link_output_extsym): Don't clear the visibility
field for relocateable.
Index: elflink.h
===================================================================
RCS file: /work/cvs/gnu/binutils/bfd/elflink.h,v
retrieving revision 1.87
diff -u -p -r1.87 elflink.h
--- elflink.h 2001/10/28 17:38:27 1.87
+++ elflink.h 2001/10/31 07:40:35
@@ -5877,7 +5877,8 @@ elf_link_output_extsym (h, data)
/* If a symbol is not defined locally, we clear the visibility
field. */
- if ((h->elf_link_hash_flags & ELF_LINK_HASH_DEF_REGULAR) == 0)
+ if (! finfo->info->relocateable
+ && (h->elf_link_hash_flags & ELF_LINK_HASH_DEF_REGULAR) == 0)
sym.st_other ^= ELF_ST_VISIBILITY (sym.st_other);
/* If this symbol should be put in the .dynsym section, then put it