Date: Tue, 3 Apr 2018 22:39:44 +0200 From: Dimitry Andric <dim@FreeBSD.org> To: Brooks Davis <brooks@one-eyed-alien.net> Cc: freebsd-toolchain@freebsd.org, Ali Mashtizadeh <ali@mashtizadeh.com> Subject: Re: splitting libc -> libc + libsys and static linking Message-ID: <DCA75254-34A6-4391-9E26-780722484BF0@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <20180403203210.GA23045@spindle.one-eyed-alien.net> References: <20180403203210.GA23045@spindle.one-eyed-alien.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
[-- Attachment #1 --] On 3 Apr 2018, at 22:32, Brooks Davis <brooks@one-eyed-alien.net> wrote: > > We (mostly Ali) are working on a patch to to split the actual syscalls > (__sys_<foo>) out of libc and into a libsys. For dynamic linking, > this is fairly straightforward (link libc against libsys, maybe as a > filter). For static linking, I'm looking for feedback on the right > approach. Do we link libsys.a into libc.a? Do we try to teach all the > compilers to add -lsys? I'm pretty sure we don't modify all the ports > that statically link programs. Is there some easy approach I'm missing? The approach chosen for e.g. libc++ (and before that, libstdc++), was to put all needed objects from the dependent libs in the same .a file. See: https://svnweb.freebsd.org/base/head/lib/libc%2B%2B/Makefile?revision=321369&view=markup#l61 and: https://svnweb.freebsd.org/base/head/gnu/lib/libstdc%2B%2B/Makefile?revision=315175&view=markup#l57 For dynamic linking, you could use your approach of putting libsys in the NEEDED section, or add it to the libc.so linker script, like what is done for libc++.so. -Dimitry [-- Attachment #2 --] -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG/MacGPG2 v2.2 iF0EARECAB0WIQR6tGLSzjX8bUI5T82wXqMKLiCWowUCWsPmkAAKCRCwXqMKLiCW ow+qAJ9PzuLj6du9JiO8vr4H0JUh2H4u5QCg36UrkMnV/LiuaOQMGUL1mQotNFs= =XCPQ -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?DCA75254-34A6-4391-9E26-780722484BF0>