From owner-freebsd-hackers Mon Mar 17 22:02:25 1997 Return-Path: Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id WAA05611 for hackers-outgoing; Mon, 17 Mar 1997 22:02:25 -0800 (PST) Received: from austin.polstra.com (austin.polstra.com [206.213.73.10]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id WAA05604 for ; Mon, 17 Mar 1997 22:02:15 -0800 (PST) Received: from austin.polstra.com (jdp@localhost) by austin.polstra.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id WAA08599; Mon, 17 Mar 1997 22:02:01 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <199703180602.WAA08599@austin.polstra.com> To: jkh@time.cdrom.com Subject: Re: gcc -shared as substitute for ld -Bshareable? Newsgroups: polstra.freebsd.hackers In-Reply-To: <24425.857903930@time.cdrom.com> References: <24425.857903930@time.cdrom.com> Organization: Polstra & Co., Seattle, WA Cc: hackers@freebsd.org Date: Mon, 17 Mar 1997 22:02:01 -0800 From: John Polstra Sender: owner-hackers@freebsd.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk In article <24425.857903930@time.cdrom.com>, Jordan K. Hubbard wrote: > Examining these build files, it really does look like Linux and SunOS > gcc supports -shared flag handling semantics rather different than > ours. Any reason we should be gratuitously different? Shall I file a > PR against this, or is it someone's idea of a feature? :-) It's a bug, and I for one would appreciate it if you'd write a PR against it. The weekly reminder messages might annoy me enough to fix it. -- John Polstra jdp@polstra.com John D. Polstra & Co., Inc. Seattle, Washington USA "Self-knowledge is always bad news." -- John Barth