Re: Partial symbol export vs --export-dynamic

["H . J . Lu" <hjl at lucon dot org>]

On Sun, Jun 17, 2001 at 08:38:24PM +0200, Hans-Peter Nilsson wrote:
> > Date: Sun, 17 Jun 2001 09:46:29 -0700
> > From: "H . J . Lu" <hjl@lucon.org>
> 
> > On Sun, Jun 17, 2001 at 05:36:47PM +0100, Nick Clifton wrote:
> > > 
> > > > In any case, I can implment it in linker if we all agree it is a
> > > > good thing to have. 
> > > 
> > > Hmm creeping featurism vs compatibility with other OS'es linkers...
> > > 
> > > I think Hans-Peter is half way through some reorganisation in this
> > > area, so it would be a good idea to check with him, but in principle I
> > > have no objections to your adding this feature.
> > 
> > I said it based on Hans-Peter's work :-). It makes implementing this
> > feature much easier. Thanks, Hans-Peter.
> > 
> > I am planning to implment it similar to symbol versioning for DSO.
> > I may be able to extend symbol versioning to executables with the
> > help from Hans-Peter's work.
> 
> I believe there is a misattribution somewhere here; I think you
> should thank someone else.  (There was a change to objcopy that
> possibly matches what you say (--keep-global-symbol), but that
> wasn't mine.  It was by HONDA Hiroki (hhonda@kobe-catv.ne.jp).)

No. It is different. It is not for the dynamic symbols.

> 
> I simply moved the export_dynamic field from ldmain.c's
> command_line struct to struct bfd_link_info.

That is what I need to implement the selective export.


H.J.