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] |
Other format: | [Raw text] |
On Mon, Jul 15, 2002 at 10:17:44AM +0930, Alan Modra wrote: > On Sun, Jul 14, 2002 at 04:32:52PM -0700, H. J. Lu wrote: > > On Mon, Jul 15, 2002 at 01:08:09AM +0930, Alan Modra wrote: > > > That's quite a few changes of mind. :) Can you tell us why you "think > > > it should work"? Why doesn't bar defined by > > > __asm__(".symver _old_bar,bar@VERS.0"); > > > not conflict with another bar, set to VERS.0 by a version script? > > > > That is because by using > > > > __asm__(".symver _old_bar,bar@VERS.0"); > > > > the intention is the definition of bar with version VERS.0 is _old_bar, > > The version script only specifies there is a bar with version VERS.0, > > nothing more. As my testcase show, it has its use. > > I suppose it's fair enough to say that a .symver takes precedence over > a version script. Would you please make a note of this in ld.texinfo? > Your patch is OK, but remove the unnecessary bfd_set_error on malloc > failure. bfd_malloc will do this for you. Ok. Here is the updated one. I will check it in shortly. Thanks. H.J.
Attachment:
bfd-version-dup.patch
Description: Text document
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |