Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sat, 15 Apr 2006 13:59:48 -0400 (EDT)
From:      Daniel Eischen <deischen@freebsd.org>
To:        "M. Warner Losh" <imp@bsdimp.com>
Cc:        victor@bsdes.net, hackers@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: Missing dependencies on shared libraries
Message-ID:  <Pine.GSO.4.64.0604151358210.9220@sea.ntplx.net>
In-Reply-To: <20060415.113630.81407700.imp@bsdimp.com>
References:  <20060414182846.GA702@pato.euesrg02.net> <Pine.GSO.4.64.0604141439280.3685@sea.ntplx.net> <20060415.113630.81407700.imp@bsdimp.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sat, 15 Apr 2006, M. Warner Losh wrote:

> In message: <Pine.GSO.4.64.0604141439280.3685@sea.ntplx.net>
>            Daniel Eischen <deischen@freebsd.org> writes:
> : On Fri, 14 Apr 2006, Victor Balada Diaz wrote:
> :
> : > Hi,
> : > I found that ldd doesn't report libc as a dependency on most (all?)
> : > libraries:
> : >
> : > pato> ldd /usr/lib/libfetch.so
> : > /usr/lib/libfetch.so:
> : >        libssl.so.3 => /usr/lib/libssl.so.3 (0x4816a000)
> : >        libcrypto.so.3 => /lib/libcrypto.so.3 (0x48198000)
> : >
> : > does anyone know why?
> :
> : AFAIK, it's being worked on.  It's not just libc either, -pthread
> : also has to start linking to libpthread.
>
> We don't record libc dependencies into shared libraries right now.  If
> we did, that would create some problems and solve some problems.  With
> symbol versioning, it most likely will become moot, since we'll never
> have to bump libc major version again...

kan stated he was working on doing this, which is what I was
referring to above.

-- 
DE



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.GSO.4.64.0604151358210.9220>