Date: Fri, 08 Feb 2002 12:48:34 +0200 From: Maxim Sobolev <sobomax@FreeBSD.org> To: Terry Lambert <tlambert2@mindspring.com> Cc: Jason Evans <jasone@canonware.com>, jdp@FreeBSD.org, deischen@FreeBSD.org, jasone@FreeBSD.org, hackers@FreeBSD.org, jlemon@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: Linking libc before libc_r into application causes weird problems Message-ID: <3C63AD02.79BA5AF5@FreeBSD.org> References: <1013147180.73417.2.camel@notebook> <20020207234233.D23162@canonware.com> <3C639A8C.6D100326@FreeBSD.org> <3C63A62D.3E4A4FC4@mindspring.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Terry Lambert wrote: > > Maxim Sobolev wrote: > > That would be nice, but we have a real problem at hand. As I said, I > > think that ld(1) should be smart enough to reorder libc/libc_r so that > > libc_r is always linked before libc. This is clearly not the case > > right now. Unfortunately there is no easy way to reproduce this, but > > if you have some spare CPU cycles try to remore explicit -pthread from > > ports/mail/evolution/Makefile, build the port on -current and do `ldd > > /usr/X11R6/bin/evolution'. You will see that libc.so.X precedes > > libc_r.so.X, even though -lc wasn't supplied to a linker, while -lc_r > > was. > > You aren't including the linker lines for the libraries > specified before the -lc_r (which may themselves be linked > against libc.so instead of libc_r.so, which is wrong), > and you aren't including the final link line. > > See the recent patch to ldd to make it work against .so > libraries (unfortunately, it's only in -current, not yet > in -stable). Heh, actually I'm an author of that patch. :))) -Maxim To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?3C63AD02.79BA5AF5>