Bug 6930
| Summary: | Both GLIBC_2.0 and GLIBC_2.1 suffixes for some APIs | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | [Retired] Red Hat Linux | Reporter: | gk4 |
| Component: | glibc | Assignee: | Cristian Gafton <gafton> |
| Status: | CLOSED NOTABUG | QA Contact: | |
| Severity: | medium | Docs Contact: | |
| Priority: | medium | ||
| Version: | 6.0 | CC: | gk4 |
| Target Milestone: | --- | ||
| Target Release: | --- | ||
| Hardware: | All | ||
| OS: | Linux | ||
| URL: | http://x26.deja.com/getdoc.xp?AN=546521605&CONTEXT=942338142.2065563766&hitnum=0 | ||
| Whiteboard: | |||
| Fixed In Version: | Doc Type: | Bug Fix | |
| Doc Text: | Story Points: | --- | |
| Clone Of: | Environment: | ||
| Last Closed: | 2000-01-04 23:58:42 UTC | Type: | --- |
| Regression: | --- | Mount Type: | --- |
| Documentation: | --- | CRM: | |
| Verified Versions: | Category: | --- | |
| oVirt Team: | --- | RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host: | |
| Cloudforms Team: | --- | Target Upstream Version: | |
| Embargoed: | |||
|
Description
gk4
1999-11-11 16:37:14 UTC
This is the symbol versioning used in glibc >= 2.1.
For example, a foo@@GLIBC_2.0 is the glibc-2.0 version of
a function, while foo@@GLIBC_2.1 is the glibc-2.1 version.
The symbol matching is done at build time. For example, if
you do objdump -p on a glibc-2.1 binary, you'll get:
Dynamic Section:
NEEDED libBrokenLocale.so.1
NEEDED libXt.so.6
NEEDED libSM.so.6
NEEDED libICE.so.6
NEEDED libXmu.so.6
NEEDED libXpm.so.4
NEEDED libXext.so.6
NEEDED libX11.so.6
NEEDED libdl.so.2
NEEDED libstdc++-libc6.1-1.so.2
NEEDED libm.so.6
NEEDED libc.so.6
as the required libraries, and:
Version References:
required from libBrokenLocale.so.1:
0x0d696910 0x00 07 GLIBC_2.0
required from libdl.so.2:
0x0d696911 0x00 08 GLIBC_2.1
0x0d696910 0x00 05 GLIBC_2.0
required from libm.so.6:
0x0d696911 0x00 06 GLIBC_2.1
0x0d696910 0x00 03 GLIBC_2.0
required from libc.so.6:
0x0d696911 0x00 04 GLIBC_2.1
0x0d696910 0x00 02 GLIBC_2.0
as the required versions of those libraries. This says that this binary,
for example, uses both glibc-2.1 and glibc-2.0 interfaces to libc.
Binaries that have no symbol versioning are mapped to the glibc-2.0
interfaces (since glibc-2.0 had no symbol versioning.)
Does that help?
get something like:
These symbols are normal - it is part of the symbol versioning implemented in glibc 2.1 |