Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2000 08:33:35 -0500 From: "Jacques A. Vidrine" <n@nectar.com> To: Daniel Eischen <eischen@vigrid.com> Cc: freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Is it time yet? [was Re: Weak symbols] Message-ID: <20000822083335.C38787@hamlet.nectar.com> In-Reply-To: <Pine.SUN.3.91.1000821200529.26995A-100000@pcnet1.pcnet.com>; from eischen@vigrid.com on Mon, Aug 21, 2000 at 08:46:44PM -0400 References: <20000821175359.C26324@hamlet.nectar.com> <Pine.SUN.3.91.1000821200529.26995A-100000@pcnet1.pcnet.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, Aug 21, 2000 at 08:46:44PM -0400, Daniel Eischen wrote: > When we want to (someday) build libpthread, it will have to be linkable > with libc. So I'll admit that I'm not ready to tackle this problem, as I don't fully understand it. But perhaps we should burn that bridge when we get to it. If I understand correctly, than implementing weak aliases in libc today will not hinder a libpthread, i.e. the same issues will need to be dealt with whether libc remains as is or we add weak aliases. Correct me if I am being shortsighted or if I have this wrong. Thank for the help, -- Jacques Vidrine / n@nectar.com / jvidrine@verio.net / nectar@FreeBSD.org To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20000822083335.C38787>