This is the mail archive of the
binutils@sources.redhat.com
mailing list for the binutils project.
RE: Linking with -lc
- From: "Harris, Jeff" <JeffH at aiinet dot com>
- To: "'H. J. Lu'" <hjl at lucon dot org>, "Harris, Jeff" <JeffH at aiinet dot com>
- Cc: amodra at bigpond dot net dot au, "'binutils at sources dot redhat dot com'" <binutils at sources dot redhat dot com>
- Date: Thu, 8 May 2003 09:55:12 -0400
- Subject: RE: Linking with -lc
I am having difficulties trying to create a test case other than the -lc
linking on ppc.
I do have more information regarding the symbols that were generated which
may shed some more light. The output of nm on the shared library
(optionally linked against libc) and the exe (linked against the shared
library) show different symbol types for the __muldf3 symbol. The four
cases I have are old/new binutils and with/without linking to -lc.
New binutils, without -lc:
libcfp.so: 00001ed8 t __muldf3
cfp1: 10001648 T __muldf3
New binutils, with -lc:
libcfp.so: U __muldf3@@GLIBC_2.3.2
cfp1: doesn't link
Old binutils, without -lc
libcfp.so: 00001ed8 t __muldf3
cfp1: 10001648 t __muldf3
Old binutils, with -lc
libcfp.so: U __muldf3@@GLIBC_2.3.2
cfp1: 10001648 t __muldf3
Running ld with the -y flag, it appears that __muldf3 comes either from
libgcc.a or libc.so.6 depending on if -lc is specified (libc.so.6) or not
(libgcc.a).
Hopefully this information will help. I couldn't see how to create a symbol
with the "t" specification to try and duplicate this issue. I'm a relative
newbie when it comes to ld scripts and forcing symbol types.
Thanks for your help.
Jeff