Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Fri, 10 Feb 2006 11:45:03 -0800
From:      Steve Kargl <sgk@troutmask.apl.washington.edu>
To:        Dan Nelson <dnelson@allantgroup.com>
Cc:        freebsd-current@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: [jakub@redhat.com:Linking against libpthread via -pthread?
Message-ID:  <20060210194503.GA10370@troutmask.apl.washington.edu>
In-Reply-To: <20060210193907.GE2090@dan.emsphone.com>
References:  <20060210181715.GA21782@troutmask.apl.washington.edu> <20060210193907.GE2090@dan.emsphone.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Fri, Feb 10, 2006 at 01:39:08PM -0600, Dan Nelson wrote:
> In the last episode (Feb 10), Steve Kargl said:
> > Some background information:  I routinely build GCC mainline on
> > i386-*-freebsd and amd64-*-freebsd.  GCC mainline is introducing
> > OpenMP support.  When libgomp.so.1 is built, the compiler is given
> > the -pthread option throughout the construction of libgomp.so.1.
> > However, a "ldd libgomp.so.1" shows no dependence on libpthread.so.2
> 
> There was a discussion about this back when the default switched from
> libc_r to libpthread, and I think the consensus was that shared
> libraries should never record dependencies against threads libs, which
> means you have to add -pthread to the link line when building the final
> executable.  This avoids problems where an executable links to three
> shlibs, one library is linked to libc_r, one's linked to libkse, and a
> third is linked to libpthread.
> 

Does this still apply with the symbol versioning that was committed
some weeks (months?) ago?   Additionally, I thought libc_r is deprecated
in FreeBSD-current (has it been moved to the attic?).

-- 
Steve



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20060210194503.GA10370>