Symbol visibility revised

[H . J . Lu]

On Thu, May 04, 2000 at 08:12:55AM +0200, Martin v. Loewis wrote:
> > Martin, your patch is ok by itself. By that, I mean it doesn't
> > introduce any new bugs. However, it is incomplete. I'd like to
> > check in your patch and at the same time to check in a testsuite,
> > ld-elfvsb, for the visibility fearture.
> 
> Thanks for reviewing my patch. If you mean by "incomplete" that
> protected is not fully supported: Yes, that is indeed the case.  As
> we've discussed before, protected visibility support probably needs to
> occur in the dynamic linker; if somebody finds a scheme to support it
> in the static linker also, that can be added later.
> 
> I'd really like to see that patch (together with your test cases) in
> binutils, so that people can try out the new C++ ABI __dso_handle
> stuff of GCC - especially since glibc 2.1.3 already has the required
> functions _cxa_atexit and _cxa_finalize.
> 
> I'm very glad that this part of the new ABI eventually works out,
> since it allows to fix a very old bug in g++ (dlclosing of shared
> libraries which had block-static objects registered with atexit).
> 

I checked in your patch. Have you looked at my testsuite patch?


H.J.