[RFC] unify dynamic_symbol_p implementations

[Ulrich Drepper]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Alan Modra wrote:

> Has someone written up a draft psABI that defines weak symbol behaviour?
> Or better, a draft gABI?  gABI on www.caldera.com is still 24 April 2001.

No, and I doubt it'll ever happen.  There is too much diversion.  Weak
symbol are, and always have been, for the implementation only.  Only the
system libraries may use them and they are tightly coupled to the
runtime linker.


> Also, if ld follows the new semantics, which versions of glibc will no
> longer build?  Not that this should deter us from changing ld, but we'd
> need to mention in release notes that older versions of glibc require
> older versions of binutils.

I don't think there is any problem with not building.  Using new lds
with old glibcs might be a problem but I have no concrete examples since
I don't know the ld changes.

- -- 
- --------------.                        ,-.            444 Castro Street
Ulrich Drepper \    ,-----------------'   \ Mountain View, CA 94041 USA
Red Hat         `--' drepper at redhat.com `---------------------------
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQE/HLEZ2ijCOnn/RHQRAvlVAKCgzqgVAQRVjTrOh5fUD/+p/9JSdACgv/FP
DU9jBd0IAPltipOIMdYrpcs=
=iGT7
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----