[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: relocation R_X86_64_PC32



On Mon, 2006-07-24 at 12:40 +0200, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
> On Thu, 2006-07-20 at 07:06 -0500, Rex Dieter wrote:
> > 
> > Thanks.   Is there a bugzilla on this and/or when can we expect -fvisibility
> > to be fixed?
> 
> well... there is no reason to add -fvisibility with current gcc's... the
> default behavior is the optimized right one already

I'm not at all sure about that, if you mean 4.1.1-9 as current gcc. The
unpushed gcc's >= 4.1.1-10 seem to do what OOo and qt apps want in
relation to visibility. So the -fvisibility feature looks set to change
in the next pushed gcc.

There's still seems plenty of reason to use -fvisibility and visibility
markup to reduce the number of exported C++ symbols, despite the welcome
new hash and local linkage of anonymous namespace symbols.

C.


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]