This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the binutils project.
Re: Binary compatibility loss regarding errno
On Mon, Dec 30, 2002 at 08:04:39PM +0100, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 30, 2002 at 10:57:44AM -0800, H. J. Lu wrote:
> > > On the other side, with
> > > .symver y,x@VERS_1
> > > .symver z,x@VERS_2
> > > reloc against SHN_UNDEF x
> > > it is unclear which of the symbols actually should be used.
> > It is kind of random. I think ld will pick the "first" one. But you can
> > always use y or z directly. That is how it is used in some places in
> > glibc.
> It is not random in current ld actually, you always end up with SHN_UNDEF x,
> ie. neither x@VERS_1 nor x@VERS_2. And no, you cannot use y or z directly,
I meant ld would pick one when generating dso/executable.
> because then if some binary has x@VERS_1 R_*_COPY reloc, you would access
> the internal version in the shared library, not x@VERS_1 in .dynbss section
> of the binary.
It depends. If you know which one you want to access, there may be a
way to do so. Show me a testcase. I will see what I can do.