This is the mail archive of the
binutils@sources.redhat.com
mailing list for the binutils project.
Re: Undefined weak symbol bug
- From: "H. J. Lu" <hjl at lucon dot org>
- To: Roland McGrath <roland at redhat dot com>,GNU C Library <libc-alpha at sources dot redhat dot com>,binutils at sources dot redhat dot com
- Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2003 23:01:21 -0800
- Subject: Re: Undefined weak symbol bug
- References: <20030325160509.A25792@lucon.org> <200303290332.h2T3WBB30737@magilla.sf.frob.com> <20030331094459.B16557@lucon.org> <20030401065623.GR1189@bubble.sa.bigpond.net.au>
On Tue, Apr 01, 2003 at 04:26:23PM +0930, Alan Modra wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 31, 2003 at 09:44:59AM -0800, H. J. Lu wrote:
> > Should ld or ld.so resolve it to zero? If ld does, should the
> > binding be changed to STB_LOCAL and remove the relocation entry?
>
> Since ld can resolve these syms, it probably should.
Undefined weak reference is never intended to be resolved by ld. Many
changes have to be made for it.
H.J.