From owner-freebsd-current Tue Apr 1 08:53:28 1997 Return-Path: Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id IAA11511 for current-outgoing; Tue, 1 Apr 1997 08:53:28 -0800 (PST) Received: from austin.polstra.com (austin.polstra.com [206.213.73.10]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id IAA11497 for ; Tue, 1 Apr 1997 08:53:24 -0800 (PST) Received: from austin.polstra.com (jdp@localhost) by austin.polstra.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id IAA02429; Tue, 1 Apr 1997 08:53:09 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <199704011653.IAA02429@austin.polstra.com> To: Doug Rabson cc: current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: A new Kernel Module System In-reply-to: Your message of "Tue, 01 Apr 1997 17:34:18 +0100." References: Date: Tue, 01 Apr 1997 08:53:09 -0800 From: John Polstra Sender: owner-current@FreeBSD.ORG X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk > I am pretty sure that if I link a bunch of objects together using > -Bshareable, then ld(1) will generate a symbol table for me. Yes, you're right. I stand corrected. You get zillions of warnings about RRS text relocations, but the output file does seem to be legitimate. I still have doubts that this buys you anything, though. Is there any advantage over just using the static symbol table and relocations? Remember, you'll have to link against kernel symbols too, and it won't have a run-time symbol table. -- John Polstra jdp@polstra.com John D. Polstra & Co., Inc. Seattle, Washington USA "Self-knowledge is always bad news." -- John Barth