Date: Thu, 18 Apr 2024 17:00:41 -0700 From: Steve Kargl <sgk@troutmask.apl.washington.edu> To: Brooks Davis <brooks@freebsd.org> Cc: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org, Michael Dexter <editor@callfortesting.org> Subject: Re: RFC: linking with --no-undefined-version Message-ID: <ZiG0KXFolmsz2tjW@troutmask.apl.washington.edu> In-Reply-To: <ZiGxnBxQbauPY2zr@spindle.one-eyed-alien.net> References: <ZiGuN-ML65sN2shW@spindle.one-eyed-alien.net> <ZiGwXzN3QBBBtcRX@troutmask.apl.washington.edu> <ZiGxnBxQbauPY2zr@spindle.one-eyed-alien.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thu, Apr 18, 2024 at 11:49:48PM +0000, Brooks Davis wrote: > On Thu, Apr 18, 2024 at 04:44:31PM -0700, Steve Kargl wrote: > > On Thu, Apr 18, 2024 at 11:35:19PM +0000, Brooks Davis wrote: > > > As of LLVM 16, lld default to --no-undefined-version which means that if > > > a symbol is listed in the symbol version map it must be present or lld > > > will fail to link. This is good because it prevents that accidental loss > > > of symbols which breaks our ABI compatibility. Unfortunately, it's > > > somewhat complicating because our symbol version maps may vary > > > per-architecture or based on options. As a result we added > > > --undefined-version to LDFLAGS. > > > > > > > Just to be clear, does this extend into /usr/ports? I only have 3020 *.so > > in /usr/local/lib. I can image that some software package may have > > missing symbols. > > Just the base system and things that use bmake infrastructure from base > (e.g., programs that got kicked out of base like ftpd), but dim@ already > fixed lots of symbol files in ports so I don't expect major issues. > Thanks for the clarification. Looks like a beneficial change. PS: Thanks for the work on libsys. -- Steve
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?ZiG0KXFolmsz2tjW>