This is the mail archive of the binutils@sourceware.org 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: gold not finding symbols in ld-linux.so.2


Kris Van Hees <kris.van.hees@oracle.com> writes:

> On Wed, Jul 02, 2008 at 09:00:30AM -0700, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
>> Then we are all still missing something.  gold does not complain about
>> undefined symbol references in shared libraries.  Why is it
>> complaining here?
>
> Well, the old linker behaviour seems to be that allow-shlib-undefined is false,
> unless linking a shared library, in which case it is true (and anything on
> the command line or in linker scripts that uses GROUP also has it false for
> the time being because groupos are meant to be self-contained).
>
> Gold on the other hand doesn't distinguish between a shared library linking
> and a non-shared library linking, in simply uses allow-shlib-undefined false
> by default.  At least in my case, that seems to be causing the unexpected
> complaint during the linking about unresolved symbols.  So, specifying
> --allow-shlib-undefined on the command line with gold solves the problem,
> but it definitely is a difference with the old linker behaviour.

Whoops, you're quite right.  I forgot about the twisty passages here.

In Symbol_table::warn_about_undefined_dynobj_symbol I see that we
explicitly don't warn about libraries found in the system library
directory, that being the directory in which we find libc.so.  I
wonder why that didn't help here?

Ian


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