On Sat, Dec 21, 2002 at 02:10:18PM +0100, Ralf Habacker wrote: >>>Maybe the horse has left the barn already but it would have been nice >>>(tm) if these type of symbols were marked in some generic way so that >>>we wouldn't have to keep remembering to extend this table. >> >>I recall commenting on this aspect in a recent binutils thread in the >>cygwin lists, and being told that it didn't matter. >> >What about putting such symbols in another named text section, so that >ld would ignore them ?
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. 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. cgf -- 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/
