glibc 2.1 and gabi
Geoff Keating
geoffk@cygnus.com
Thu Jul 20 20:28:00 GMT 2000
More information about the Binutils mailing list
Thu Jul 20 20:28:00 GMT 2000
- Previous message (by thread): glibc 2.1 and gabi
- Next message (by thread): glibc 2.1 and gabi
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
> Date: Thu, 20 Jul 2000 17:09:46 -0700 > From: "H . J . Lu" <hjl@lucon.org> > Cc: libc-hacker@sourceware.cygnus.com, binutils@sourceware.cygnus.com, > ian@zembu.com > Content-Disposition: inline > User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.2i > > On Thu, Jul 20, 2000 at 04:12:05PM -0700, Geoff Keating wrote: > > > Date: Thu, 20 Jul 2000 15:52:45 -0700 > > > From: "H . J . Lu" <hjl@lucon.org> > > > Cc: libc-hacker@sourceware.cygnus.com, binutils@sourceware.cygnus.com, > > > ian@zembu.com > > > > > For the most parts, the new tags replace the old ones with a little > > > twist. They come from the new gABI. > > > > I guess the question I'm really asking is "when do I need to switch on > > these tags? and why can't the linker do it for me?". > > You can use it when you are certain your C library supports it. Glibc > 2.2 is ok. The linker may not know what the runtime linker will do > when it sees a known dtag. As more and more new features are added to > those new dtags, glibc may need them to work correctly. I know I _can_ use it, but when do I _have_ to use it? What would go wrong if the linker never emitted any of these tags? -- - Geoffrey Keating <geoffk@cygnus.com>
- Previous message (by thread): glibc 2.1 and gabi
- Next message (by thread): glibc 2.1 and gabi
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
More information about the Binutils mailing list