PR 18167, Relax PR 15228 protected visibility restriction
H.J. Lu
hjl.tools@gmail.com
Fri Mar 27 18:13:00 GMT 2015
On Fri, Mar 27, 2015 at 11:02 AM, Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com> wrote:
> On 03/27/2015 05:56 PM, H.J. Lu wrote:
>> On Fri, Mar 27, 2015 at 10:39 AM, Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com> wrote:
>>> On 03/27/2015 05:25 PM, H.J. Lu wrote:
>>>> On Fri, Mar 27, 2015 at 10:09 AM, H.J. Lu <hjl.tools@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> On Fri, Mar 27, 2015 at 10:06 AM, Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com> wrote:
>
>>>>>>> If one of gcc, glibc or binutils isn't fixed, the program may misbehave.
>>>>>>> I don't know how it be avoided at run-time with fixing all 3.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I'm not really worried about gcc or binutils. Those are easy to
>>>>>> update. The issue is picking a binary that was built against fixed
>>>>>> gcc and binutils, and then running it on an system that happens to
>>>>>> not have glibc fixed. That just seems like ABI breakage.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> How about emitting a reference to a symbol that only fixed glibc
>>>>>> provides?
>>>>>
>>>>> It is easy to verify. Stay tuned.
>>
>> Yes, the program will misbehave if the run-time glibc isn't
>> fixed.
>
> OK. I'm a bit confused now. Are you going to try the idea
> suggested above?
No. There is nothing to try. You can't fix the old binary. The
new glibc works with the old binary.
--
H.J.
More information about the Binutils
mailing list