protected symbols

Hello again, and CQ:

At least gcc_x86_64 4.8 does have a bug. It does export "protected"
symbols as 32 bit PC relative addressing. GNU ld 2.26+ rejects this
because an application might want to redirect to an address 2^31 or
further away.

This can be fixed by using gcc 5.0+.
This can also be fixed by expanding the protection to entire .so:

   $ export LDFLAGS="-Wl,-Bsymbolic"
   $ ./configure

My question now is:
Should we do the latter generally?
I tested OK with various older systems.
Or does it really make sense allowing applications to override
just _part_ of libxine.so (all .o's except the actual originator
of that particular symbol)?

Torsten


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Developer Access Program for Intel Xeon Phi Processors
Access to Intel Xeon Phi processor-based developer platforms.
With one year of Intel Parallel Studio XE.
Training and support from Colfax.
Order your platform today.http://sdm.link/intel