This is the mail archive of the
binutils@sources.redhat.com
mailing list for the binutils project.
Re: PATCH: Handle undefined symbol in DSO from DT_NEEDED
On Wed, May 09, 2001 at 11:36:37AM +0200, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Tue, May 08, 2001 at 09:30:54PM -0700, H . J . Lu wrote:
> > On Tue, May 08, 2001 at 09:25:42PM -0700, Ulrich Drepper wrote:
> > > "H . J . Lu" <hjl@lucon.org> writes:
> > >
> > > > glibc 2.2.3 changes atexit from default to hidden. DSOs with
> > > > unversioned references to atexit fail to link if they are loaded
> > > > in via a DT_NEEDED entry. This patch makes it non-fatal. I will
> > > > check it in if I don't hear any objections by Thursday.
> > >
> > > Why should the linker ignore bugs? Don't work around problems users
> > > introduced. Make them fix their code.
> > >
> >
> > DSOs compiled against glibc 2.0 may have unversioned references to
> > atexit. I won't blame people for compiling DSOs against glibc 2.0.
>
> Are you sure it does not work or is it just a guess?
> I've just compiled a program using atexit on a glibc 2.0.7 system (RHL 5.2),
> plus a program using shared library which uses atexit on the same box, moved
> them to glibc 2.2.3 box (both the program and DSO have unversioned atexit
> reference, glibc has atexit@GLIBC_2.0 only) and they work very well.
>
But can you link against this 2.0.7 compiled DSO on the 2.2.3 system? I
think that is what HJ is getting at.
Ben
--
-----------=======-=-======-=========-----------=====------------=-=------
/ Ben Collins -- ...on that fantastic voyage... -- Debian GNU/Linux \
` bcollins@debian.org -- bcollins@openldap.org -- bcollins@linux.com '
`---=========------=======-------------=-=-----=-===-======-------=--=---'