Re: PR 18167, Relax PR 15228 protected visibility restriction

[Pedro Alves <palves at redhat dot com>]

On 03/27/2015 07:12 PM, H.J. Lu wrote:
>> > But I've been talking about the opposite all along.  Let
>> > me reiterate.
>> >
>> > When protected visibility variables are fixed in gcc and binutils,
>> > programs and libraries will start making use of the feature, well,
>> > because it now works.  While before, people didn't make
>> > use of the feature.
>> >
>> > Because of that, I'm arguing that it's important that programs
>> > that reference protected variables built with new gcc/binutils,
>> > fail to load with old glibc, instead of misbehaving randomly.
>> >
>> > Thus the idea of making new gcc/ld have new programs reference a
>> > symbol that only new glibc provides, so that old glibc can't
>> > satisfy it and thus new programs with old glibc just don't run
>> > at all.  Or something along else those lines: some elf bit;
>> > some attribute; something.
>> >
> This feature has been used today as shown in PR 18167.
> I don't see a way to make GCC/binutils require a specific
> version of glibc to use it.

So skip the requirement under the same conditions Alan
skipped the linker check in this PR18167 patch, otherwise,
enforce it?

Thanks,
Pedro Alves