Documenting the (dynamic) linking rules for symbol versioning
Florian Weimer
fweimer@redhat.com
Fri Apr 28 14:19:00 GMT 2017
On 04/20/2017 04:07 PM, Michael Kerrisk (man-pages) wrote:
> Suppose we have a version script:
>
> [[
> VER_1 {
> global: xyz;
> local: *;
> };
>
> VER_2 {
> ...
> } VER_1;
>
> VER_3 {
> ...
> } VER_2;
> ]]
>
> And we have a C file that defines xyz@VER_1, xyz@VER_2, and xyz@VER_3.
>
> Now suppose that we want to add a VER_4 tag to the map, and a new
> function, abc(), to our C source file (so that we will end up with
> a symbol abc@VER_4).
>
> Suppose also that in programs that link against the new library (built
> with the VER_4 map), we want the symbol xyz() to no longer be accessible
> to ld(1). There appears to be two ways to do this:
>
> * Don't define an xyz@VER_4 (or, of course, xyz@@VER_4) in our
> C source file.
> * Define an xyz@VER_4.
Okay, I think I'm getting our misunderstanding now.
If xyz was previously part of the public API, then one of the versions
xyz@VER_1, xyz@VER2, xyz@VER_3 must have been a default version, so
probably xyz@@VER_3.
If I understand you correctly, you want to remove xyz from the API. So
we need to get rid of the default version. In this case, I think most
people just use a .symver directive with a non-default versions, in this
example xyz@VER_3. This overrides the version script as far as this
particular symbol is concerned.
There is no need to introduce VER_4 for this symbol, default or not.
Does this clarify matters?
Thanks,
Florian
More information about the Libc-alpha
mailing list