Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 8 Dec 1999 00:44:10 -0800 | From | "David S. Miller" <> | Subject | Re: What I suspect |
| |
Date: Tue, 7 Dec 1999 23:57:53 -0800 (PST) From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@transmeta.com>
So I still think pre-linking should be perfectly fine =without= checking weak symbols like Davem suggested. In fact, I'd argue that re-checking is the wrong thing to do from a "least surprises" standpoint.
It's not an odd event. It's a feature... Say you want to provide your own special malloc, your strong "malloc" symbol now not only overrides the global references to the "malloc" symbol in the binary itself, but also all of those global references within libc too (and all other shared libraries you load, even via dl_open()). If you want to override any and all malloc activity (and this is useful for malloc/free leak debuggers like electric fence for example) this global weak overriding mechanism is the way it can be done.
This is the specified ELF behavior, we didn't make this up. :-) And it's there so you can do things like "oh I want to override open() so it understands WWW urls" or things like my malloc example.
Later, David S. Miller davem@redhat.com
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |