Re: Missing variable 'pe_data_import_dll'

[Charles Wilson <cwilson at ece dot gatech dot edu>]

 > Hi Paul,
 >
 > Your recent patch to ld/pe-dll.c:
 >
 > 2001-08-02  Paul Sokolovsky  <paul.sokolovsky@technologist.com>
 >


This patch originated with Paul; however, I and others modified it
significantly before it was accepted into binutils CVS.


 >
 > created a reference to an external variable called: 'pe_data_import_dll'
 >  in the function pe_create_import_fixup().


Ah.  but this particular variable (which started life as
"data_import_dll") originated in a part of the code which was carried
unchanged from Paul's original.  So, it is correct that questions about
this should be directed to Paul...but I'll elaborate below.


 > Unfortunately this new variable does not appear to be defined anywhere!
 >   (At least it was not defined when I tried to build the arm-epoc-pe
 >  target today).


It is defined in emultempl/pe.em.  From my personal "auto-import STATUS"
list:

 > 1. make pe_data_import_dll static? No, used in both pe.em and
 > pe-dll.c. But why? Is this really necessary -- it sure is ugly. Can
 >  we fix it?

So, it is on the agenda -- but I did not realize the problem would cause
a build failure for another platform.  So, that makes increases its 
priority...

Unfortunately, I am not sure why this "data sharing" between pe.em and
pe-dll.c is necessary, and haven't had time to dig into it yet.  Worse,
my development machine is dead and shipped back to manufacturer for
repair.  Sigh.

Paul, I asked you before ( in message "Re: [RFA] pei386 dll: auto-import
patch" at 2:03am on Aug 2 ) about this variable

 >>> +char *data_import_dll;
 >>>
 >>
 >> Should this be static?
 >
 > No, it's used in both pe.em and pe-dll.c.  Although, I'm not really
 > sure why.  Paul? Robert?  If it really needs to be public, I
 > suppose we should rename it pe_data_import_dll.

Please comment; is there any way to eliminate the use of this global?

Thanks,
Chuck