Paul Pluzhnikov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > "Boris" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > >>> [This topic has strayed too far from g++. Perhaps you should take >>> it to *advocacy* group.] >> >> Which group do you mean? > > comp.os.linux.advocacy - Benefits of Linux compared to other > operating systems. > > You can tell them how you think Linux 'ld' has the wrong behaviour, > and start a flame war there.
As this is a discussion about the linker I fail to see how redirecting to an _OS_ advocay group can possibly help the OP - especially as you seem well aware of the outcome. >>> You know that you don't want these symbols to be exported, but the >>> linker can't "read your mind", and doesn't. >> >> I tried to explain that the linker can know as it simply needs to >> check for --whole-archive being present or not. > > I perfectly understand what you are trying to say, but you refuse to > understand what I am trying to explain: while the behaviour you desire > may appear "obvious and correct" to you, it is by no means "obvious > and correct" to me, nor to people who wrote 'ld'. I think you made this perfectly clear. However, having different points of view is not necessarily a good reason to stop a discussion immediately. Andre' _______________________________________________ help-gplusplus mailing list help-gplusplus@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/help-gplusplus
