Re: PATCH: Better handle discarded definition (take 2)

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

On Tue, Jun 03, 2003 at 12:53:22AM +0930, Alan Modra wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 02, 2003 at 08:01:02AM -0700, H. J. Lu wrote:
> > The current handling of discarded definitions is not very informative.
> > It is very easy to tell what the problem really is. This patch tries
> > to improve it.
> 
> > -			      if (! ((*finfo->info->callbacks->undefined_symbol)
> [snip]
> > +			    finfo->info->callbacks->error_handler
> 
> I like the idea of giving better error messages, but is it correct in
> this case to use error_handler instead of undefined_symbol?  Someone
> might be using bfd with their own undefined_symbol handler.
> 

The problem is the symbol is not exactly undefined. I think
undefined_symbol is misused here.


H.J.