Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com From: "Ralf Habacker" To: , Subject: RE: [PATCH] exclude runtime-pseudo-reloc symbols from auto-export Date: Sun, 22 Dec 2002 14:35:24 +0100 Message-ID: <001801c2a9be$fb4579f0$c65e07d5@BRAMSCHE> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 In-Reply-To: <20021221171952.GA22113@redhat.com> Hi Chris, 1. >I don't see how you could do that since the symbol is associated with an >existing place in memory. We could put the whole function in a >different segment but that's not the kind of solution I was thinking of. 2. > I was thinking that there might be an unused attribute that could be > pressed into service as a "don't auto export" (doesn't linux/elf have > something like this?) or that there was a way to name the symbol in some > way that wasn't easily available from a C program, like putting a "." in > the name with an asm alias. this would require a special attribute definition and special asm code and some work in the ld. Let me ask one question: Why do you like to make a new non standard way (2) to mark such things where the section setting stuff (1) is already part of the gcc standard. In both cases an ld patch is necessary, so it seems to me, that 1 would be lesser efforts. Ralf -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Bug reporting: http://cygwin.com/bugs.html Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/