On Fri, Apr 20, 2012 at 5:49 PM, Ian Lance Taylor <i...@google.com> wrote: > "H.J. Lu" <hjl.to...@gmail.com> writes: > >> In our usage, the backup definition may not be at the end of >> command line since it may reference library symbols. > > You could write out the backup function you need under a different name. > Then have the backup symbol at the end of the link call the new name of > the backup function.
isn't it replacing one backup with another backup? > I agree that this kind of approach is less convenient, but this doesn't > seem like a persuasive choice for one of the two remaining OS-dependent > symbol binding numbers. Perhaps you should try to sell this idea to the > ELF ABI, the generic space has seven available numbers. > We are looking for a solution to have the backup definition which can be overridden by a normal definition from an archive or shared object. Weak symbol doesn't work here. I will ask in the gABI group. Thanks. -- H.J.
