Re: [PATCH] ld: Add '--defined' command line option.

[Nick Clifton <nickc at redhat dot com>]

Hi Andrew,

  I like this patch in principle, but there are a few problems with it 
at the moment:

  * Is this patch really necessary ?  Can the same affect not be 
achieved by combining --undefined= and --no-undefined ?  If not, why not ?

  * I think that the name of the option, --defined is slightly 
confusing.  When I first read your submission I thought that it meant 
that a defined symbol was being created, ie that it was an alias of 
--defsym.  So how about a different name ?  For example 
--no-allow-undef=<foo>.  [This version might even be extended so the the 
inverse option --allow-undef=<foo> would stop --no-undefined from 
complaining if that particular symbol was undefined].  Or how about 
--undefined-and-err= so that the connection with --undefined is more 
obvious ?

  * The documentation needs to be extended.  You need an entry in the 
ld/NEWS file and an update to the --undefined entry in ld/ld.texinfo 
referring the reader to the new option and explaining why they might 
want to use it instead.

  * The new tests need to be extend to make sure that the linker does 
not complain if the defined symbol does exist, and that the new option 
does duplicate the behaviour of the --undefined option.

Cheers
  Nick