Re: Hide __[u]{div,mod}di3

[Andreas Schwab <schwab at suse dot de>]

Roland McGrath <roland@redhat.com> writes:

|> > Franz Sirl <Franz.Sirl-kernel@lauterbach.com> writes:
|> > 
|> > |> On Sunday 26 January 2003 01:47, Andreas Schwab wrote:
|> > |> > +compat_symbol (libc, __umoddi3, __umoddi3, GLIBC_2_0);
|> > |> 
|> > |> Shouldn't that be GLIBC_2.0 (. not _)?
|> > 
|> > No, this must be a valid identifier, which is translated via
|> > abi-versions.h into the actual version (which might not be GLIBC_2.0 after
|> > all).  It's a wrapper around symbol_version.
|> > 
|> > |> I also wonder why you didn't wrap it with a SHLIB_COMPAT?
|> > 
|> > I'm not sure whether it is needed.
|> 
|> If you don't use SHLIB_COMPAT, you will compile in unexported dead code on
|> a configuration that doesn't need to support GLIBC_2.0.

These functions will never be dead, since they are used by glibc itself.

Andreas.

-- 
Andreas Schwab, SuSE Labs, schwab@suse.de
SuSE Linux AG, Deutschherrnstr. 15-19, D-90429 Nürnberg
Key fingerprint = 58CA 54C7 6D53 942B 1756  01D3 44D5 214B 8276 4ED5
"And now for something completely different."