Date: Thu, 01 Feb 1996 16:29:53 -0800 From: John Polstra <jdp@polstra.com> To: Peter Wemm <peter@jhome.DIALix.COM> Cc: nate@sri.MT.net, CVS-committers@freebsd.org, cvs-lib@freebsd.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/lib/csu/i386 crt0.c Message-ID: <199602020029.QAA01165@austin.polstra.com> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Fri, 02 Feb 1996 08:20:47 %2B0800." <199602020020.IAA17373@jhome.DIALix.COM>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Peter wrote: > >> I think this will solve the problem... > > > >I think it will, too. But, why do you want to solve the problem by > >adding 4 lines to the Makefile, when you could solve it instead by > >removing 2 lines?? > > The only thing I was wondering about was if anything in "lib" had > c++t0.o linked into it... It doesn't look like it, but it nearly was > a while ago... Oh! Very good point! I hadn't thought of that. Probably, nothing in "lib" has c++rt0.o linked into it at the moment. But, you're right, eventually *every* shared library will have it linked in. (I figured out why that caused problems before, when I eliminated CPLUSPLUSLIB. It's easy to fix. But I haven't figured out a way to solve the associated bootstrapping problems. Sigh...) Also, if we implement Chris P's proposed solution for thread_init (using a C++ static constructor), then we will have to link c++rt0.o into libc, at least. Anyway, now I agree that we should use your solution in the top-level Makefile, and not mine. Thanks! -- John
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199602020029.QAA01165>