Message: previous - next
Month: October 2012

Re: [trinity-devel] To hide or not to hide (symbols)

From: "Timothy Pearson" <kb9vqf@...>
Date: Sat, 20 Oct 2012 19:03:16 -0500
> Been a long time since we discussed gcc hidden visibility for symbols.
> Last I remember, this was supported in (T)Qt3, arts, tdelibs, and tdebase.
> I tried building my normal package suite with this option enabled in every
> package. Some packages built but ignored the configure option. Some failed
> to build.  Some built and there were no messages at all about the option.
> Removing the option from the failure group allowed the packages to build.
> For the latter group, as no errors or build failures occurred, I presume
> the option is supported.
> Still, is this a good idea? I read a bit about the topic and the
> information is way over my head. The only thing I do understand is using
> the option is supposed to reduce libary size and improve loading speeds.
> Darrell

Yes, hidden symbols are a good thing and are enabled by default .on the
Debian/Ubuntu builds.  I am somewhat surprised that you have encountered
build failures; which modules failed to build?