[PATCH] LD: PROVIDE_HIDDEN export class problem

[Maciej W. Rozycki]

On Wed, 1 May 2013, Joseph S. Myers wrote:

> >  The question is: has it been a deliberate decision to make tic6x-* unlike 
> > any other target in how STV_INTERNAL symbols appear in the static linker 
> > table?  Why does this backend do it, i.e. what piece of code is 
> > responsible for it?
> 
> I am not aware of such a decision and do not know what code is responsible 
> for it.

 OK, thanks for your input.  As it happens the new version of the tests I 
have just posted does not see a difference between tic6x-* and other 
targets because unmodified bfd_elf_record_link_assignment forces all 
symbols mentioned in PROVIDE_HIDDEN commands to be STB_LOCAL/STV_DEFAULT 
regardless of the origin of the symbols.  Therefore I'm leaving it up to 
you to decide if investigating the difference for ordinary STV_INTERNAL 
(and presumably STV_HIDDEN) symbols is worth any effort.

  Maciej