From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Fri, 17 Jan 2003 02:25:19 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Fri, 17 Jan 2003 02:25:19 -0500 Received: from dell-paw-3.cambridge.redhat.com ([195.224.55.237]:63483 "EHLO passion.cambridge.redhat.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Fri, 17 Jan 2003 02:25:18 -0500 X-Mailer: exmh version 2.5 13/07/2001 with nmh-1.0.4 From: David Woodhouse X-Accept-Language: en_GB In-Reply-To: <20030116180913.C15981@twiddle.net> References: <20030116180913.C15981@twiddle.net> <20030114171457.E5751@twiddle.net> <20030117015756.409DF2C437@lists.samba.org> To: Richard Henderson Cc: Rusty Russell , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, davem@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [module-init-tools] fix weak symbol handling Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2003 07:34:14 +0000 Message-ID: <30299.1042788854@passion.cambridge.redhat.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org rth@twiddle.net said: > > > No. The semantics I need is if A references a weak symbol S > > > and *no one* implements it, then S resolves to NULL. > > > > Sorry, I was unclear. I want to know the dependency semantics: > > If B exports S, should depmod believe A needs B, or not? Your patch > leaves that semantic (all it does is suppress the errors). > Well, that depends on whether A defines S or not. If A does define S, > then I don't care. I'd say "no", A does not depend on B. If A does > not define S, then most definitely "yes", as with any other > definition. As long as doing so doesn't make modprobe fail to load A when B isn't present or refuses to load. Otherwise what was the point in making it weak? -- dwmw2