Rainer Orth wrote: > Ali Bahrami writes: > >> We're not aware of any missing symbol visibility support in the >> Solaris linker relative to the GNU ld, and believe that all of >> this stuff has been stable and present for years. STV_PROTECTED >> and friends went into Solaris 9 (PSARC/2000/267), so backports >> may not even be necessary. > > Do you know if this went into Solaris 9 FCS, or some update release? In > the former case one could get away with a version test in gcc/configure.ac, > in the latter either a feature test would be necessary (any suggestions on > how to test this?) or one would need to be conservative and assume that Sun > ld only support visibility in Solaris 10 and up. > >> We don't work on the assemblers, but have no reason to think >> that they're lacking in this area either. > > Same problem: did the support appear in some FCS release or was it > delivered via updates/patches? This doesn't affect Solaris/x86, anyway: > unless you restrict yourself to a 32-bit-only GCC, gas is required because > Sun as lacks (or lacked, I haven't tested this in a long time) some > features necessary for amd64 support. > >> I think the next step forward would be to ask the gcc community >> why their configuration makes this assumption about the non-GNU >> ld on Solaris. Perhaps it's a historical artifact and could just >> be changed. > > GCC still supports older Solaris versions, so it either needs to check for > the presence of a feature or make the most conservative assumption on when > some specific feature was introduced. > >> If there *is* a lack in the Solaris toolchain for visibility, >> we would very much appreciate a concrete report detailing >> what's missing so that we can address it. > > The problem here seems to be primarily that nobody really cares too much > about GCC on Solaris: SPARC maintenance is largely dormant these days and > while some GCC users test SVN versions on releases on Solaris/x86, nobody > does so regularly. I seem to be the only one who tries to test and fix > stuff (I even happen to have commit access), but this is not my day job. > > If I find that something is missing in recent versions of Solaris, I'll > certainly report it. > > Rainer > > ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- > Rainer Orth, Faculty of Technology, Bielefeld University
I checked, and it appears that this support was in Solaris 9 FCS, as well as Solaris 8 Update 5. I cannot answer the question about the assemblers, but feel pretty confident in saying that they probably didn't have much of anything to support, and that anything needed was probably in place by Solaris 9 FCS. Perhaps one of the compiler experts on this list can fill in those details for us. It looks to me like it would be safe to assume it will work for S9 and up. At a minimum, it should be enabled for S10 and up. Any reported problems on those platforms would be fixed very quickly. - Ali
