relocation errors on solaris 10 u10 due to symbol versioning from ld
Alan Modra
amodra@gmail.com
Tue Oct 11 13:53:00 GMT 2011
More information about the Binutils mailing list
Tue Oct 11 13:53:00 GMT 2011
- Previous message (by thread): relocation errors on solaris 10 u10 due to symbol versioning from ld
- Next message (by thread): PATCH: PR binutils/13257: NM + plugin does not list correctly symbols in thin archives
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
On Mon, Oct 10, 2011 at 06:40:20AM -0700, Schneider, Bennett wrote: > Hi, > After updating to solaris 10 u10, I've been seeing issues with > libstdc++ that I believe are a result of output from the gnu linker > (binutils 2.19). I'm getting relocation errors when using certain > symbols from libstdc++. LD_DEBUG output shows that these are not > being considered because the interpreter believes that they have the > hidden bit set: They do. From include/elf/common.h /* This flag appears in a Versym structure. It means that the symbol is hidden, and is only visible with an explicit version number. This is a GNU extension. */ #define VERSYM_HIDDEN 0x8000 /* This is the mask for the rest of the Versym information. */ #define VERSYM_VERSION 0x7fff > Using elfdump on libstdc++ shows that certain symbols seem to have > extra bits set that are now being interpreted as hidden. Yup > The previous output was for the ver to be 32770 (0x8002). ie. your previous tools (and possibly ld.so) did not understand the HIDDEN bit. -- Alan Modra Australia Development Lab, IBM
- Previous message (by thread): relocation errors on solaris 10 u10 due to symbol versioning from ld
- Next message (by thread): PATCH: PR binutils/13257: NM + plugin does not list correctly symbols in thin archives
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
More information about the Binutils mailing list