Date: Fri, 25 Dec 2015 16:03:16 -0500 (EST) From: Daniel Eischen <deischen@freebsd.org> To: Ed Schouten <ed@nuxi.nl> Cc: Colin Percival <cperciva@freebsd.org>, src-committers <src-committers@freebsd.org>, svn-src-all@freebsd.org, svn-src-head@freebsd.org Subject: Re: svn commit: r292723 - in head: lib/libc share/mk Message-ID: <Pine.GSO.4.64.1512251601360.15474@sea.ntplx.net> In-Reply-To: <CABh_MKmMT6EuKMPOan=ibL_J3zbSPSVFk5eAbuEoNr_hjBNq8Q@mail.gmail.com> References: <201512251129.tBPBTIZp058825@repo.freebsd.org> <CABh_MKmMT6EuKMPOan=ibL_J3zbSPSVFk5eAbuEoNr_hjBNq8Q@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Fri, 25 Dec 2015, Ed Schouten wrote: > Hi Colin, > > First of all: I Am Not A Linker Expert. > > 2015-12-25 12:29 GMT+01:00 Colin Percival <cperciva@freebsd.org>: >> Make libxnet.so a symlink to libc.so. This makes `-lxnet` a no-op, as >> POSIX requires for the c99 compiler. > > I seem to remember I had some issues in the past where I was linking > against libc explicitly. Maybe it had something to do with linking > both against -lpthread and -lc, but if you pass in -lc later on the > command line, libc overrides the symbols that have to be provided by > -lpthread? > > If that's (still) the case, would it make sense to just provide > libxnet in the form of an empty .a file instead? I think that's a good point. Using -lanything shouldn't introduce an unexpected link order. -- DE
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.GSO.4.64.1512251601360.15474>