delorie.com/archives/browse.cgi | search |
Mailing-List: | contact cygwin-apps-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm |
Sender: | cygwin-apps-owner AT cygwin DOT com |
List-Subscribe: | <mailto:cygwin-apps-subscribe AT cygwin DOT com> |
List-Archive: | <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin-apps/> |
List-Post: | <mailto:cygwin-apps AT cygwin DOT com> |
List-Help: | <mailto:cygwin-apps-help AT cygwin DOT com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/lists.html#faqs> |
Mail-Followup-To: | cygwin-apps AT cygwin DOT com |
Delivered-To: | mailing list cygwin-apps AT cygwin DOT com |
content-class: | urn:content-classes:message |
Subject: | RE: Excude whole libs when building w32 dlls with -export-all |
MIME-Version: | 1.0 |
Date: | Sun, 28 Apr 2002 03:35:33 +1000 |
X-MimeOLE: | Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.0.5762.3 |
Message-ID: | <FC169E059D1A0442A04C40F86D9BA7600C5F30@itdomain003.itdomain.net.au> |
X-MS-Has-Attach: | |
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: | |
From: | "Robert Collins" <robert DOT collins AT itdomain DOT com DOT au> |
To: | "Charles Wilson" <cwilson AT ece DOT gatech DOT edu> |
Cc: | "Danny Smith" <danny_r_smith_2001 AT yahoo DOT co DOT nz>, |
"binutils" <binutils AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>, | |
"cygwin-apps" <cygwin-apps AT cygwin DOT com> | |
X-MIME-Autoconverted: | from quoted-printable to 8bit by delorie.com id g3RHZce20469 |
> -----Original Message----- > From: Charles Wilson [mailto:cwilson AT ece DOT gatech DOT edu] > Sent: Sunday, April 28, 2002 2:26 AM > To: Robert Collins > Cc: Danny Smith; binutils; cygwin-apps > Subject: Re: Excude whole libs when building w32 dlls with -export-all > > > Robert Collins wrote: > > > > Can we detect libs and automatically exclude symbols from shared > > libraries? > > > > i.e. when linking against libcygwin.a, ALL symbols therein > are from a > > dll, so -by default- should not be exported. > > > Picky point: that's not true in this case. libcygwin.a, unlike most > import libs, contains actual code as well as import thunks > for cygwin1.dll. Yeah well :}. Actually most import libs can be considered to contain code - that's what the standard stub is. The important point is not to *ignore* the library, but to not *re-export* it's symbols. > I dunno if we need something *less* granular (e.g. never never never > export ANY symbol of ANY kind that comes from *.dll) ... > maybe so. But, > this is a separate argument from Danny's proposed patch. True. However the current code in ld is a kludge. Always has-been, and if not fixed... always will-be. I too like the patch Danny has put forward, (not that I didn't speak against it :]). I'm hoping to review Ralf's patch tomorrow & will try and get to Danny's as well. I'm going to test on a non-HEAD ld, and if that works correctly, then IMO it can go into HEAD... as long as that part hasn't altered significantly between my testpoint and HEAD. Rob
webmaster | delorie software privacy |
Copyright © 2019 by DJ Delorie | Updated Jul 2019 |