[RFC] alpha-elf vs copy_indirect_symbol

[Alan Modra]

On Tue, Jun 14, 2011 at 09:14:02AM -0700, Richard Henderson wrote:
> What concerns me is that copy_indirect_symbol is called for things
> that aren't indirect symbols.  In particular, we call this hook for
> defweak and defined symbols.

The weak and strong symbols in question are both non-function symbols
defined in a shared lib, eg. timezone and _timezone.

>  Which might be fine, I suppose, if we
> then *replaced* the defweak symbol in the sym_hashes table so that
> we never ever see it again.  I have no idea what the current usage
> is supposed to accomplish.

It started life as a means to copy over symbol flags from the weak to
strong sym.  Without doing some archaeology I'm not sure why we
also transfer over dyn_relocs on most targets.

-- 
Alan Modra
Australia Development Lab, IBM