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]

Re: ELIMINATE_COPY_RELOCS problems on ppc

From: Alan Modra <amodra at bigpond dot net dot au>
To: Jakub Jelinek <jakub at redhat dot com>, Geoffrey Keating <geoffk at geoffk dot org>,binutils at sources dot redhat dot com, Luca Barbato <lu_zero at gentoo dot org>
Date: Thu, 03 Apr 2003 11:23:13 +0930
Subject: Re: ELIMINATE_COPY_RELOCS problems on ppc
References: <20030402144228.GP16629@sunsite.ms.mff.cuni.cz><20030402231509.GZ1189@bubble.sa.bigpond.net.au><20030403001524.GA1189@bubble.sa.bigpond.net.au>

On Thu, Apr 03, 2003 at 09:45:24AM +0930, Alan Modra wrote:
> Also, I'd like to hear from Geoff as to why we
> have both SYMBOL_REFERENCES_LOCAL and SYMBOL_CALLS_LOCAL, introduced
> by http://sources.redhat.com/ml/binutils/2000-10/msg00184.html.  They
> differ in that SYMBOL_REFERENCES_LOCAL doesn't consider STV_PROTECTED
> syms as local, which seems a bit strange to me.

Oh, nevermind.  I'm a dunce.  Funny how seeing a testcase fail,
glibc's elf/vismain.c in this case, makes things obvious.  :)

-- 
Alan Modra
IBM OzLabs - Linux Technology Centre

Follow-Ups:
- Re: ELIMINATE_COPY_RELOCS problems on ppc
  - From: Alan Modra
- Re: ELIMINATE_COPY_RELOCS problems on ppc
  - From: H. J. Lu

References:
- ELIMINATE_COPY_RELOCS problems on ppc
  - From: Jakub Jelinek
- Re: ELIMINATE_COPY_RELOCS problems on ppc
  - From: Alan Modra
- Re: ELIMINATE_COPY_RELOCS problems on ppc
  - From: Alan Modra

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