Proposal for STT_GNU_IFUNC and R_*_IRELATIVE
Ulrich Drepper
drepper@redhat.com
Tue May 26 17:45:00 GMT 2009
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Rod Evans wrote:
> Late last year there was a discussion in regards STT_IFUNC, and we
> thought you'd settled on this name (no _GNU_) and the associated
> value of 7.
No. Because _you_ said you don't want this we settled on an OS-specific
value and name.
> I assume we should now remove this dead-wood and reserve the STT_LOOS
> value instead.
Why reserve it? It's OS-specific. Nobody will crowd that range but you
and if you should use it and it's a different value, then it doesn't
matter either.
- --
⧠Ulrich Drepper ⧠Red Hat, Inc. ⧠444 Castro St ⧠Mountain View, CA â
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)
iEYEARECAAYFAkocKdwACgkQ2ijCOnn/RHRRWwCfbSofNRTx5qCs4fm+LC6xUQvQ
LFIAoKFxCU72dVRRV1TqH+86lyKKknDK
=MtoW
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
More information about the Libc-alpha
mailing list