Date: Fri, 08 Feb 2002 07:06:09 -0800 From: Terry Lambert <tlambert2@mindspring.com> To: Maxim Sobolev <sobomax@FreeBSD.org> Cc: Ruslan Ermilov <ru@FreeBSD.org>, Jason Evans <jasone@canonware.com>, jdp@FreeBSD.org, deischen@FreeBSD.org, jasone@FreeBSD.org, hackers@FreeBSD.org, jlemon@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: Linking libc before libc_r into application causes weird problems Message-ID: <3C63E961.45706408@mindspring.com> References: <1013147180.73417.2.camel@notebook> <20020207234233.D23162@canonware.com> <3C639A8C.6D100326@FreeBSD.org> <3C63A62D.3E4A4FC4@mindspring.com> <3C63AD02.79BA5AF5@FreeBSD.org> <20020208164132.D78163@sunbay.com> <3C63E5D1.1E423698@FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Maxim Sobolev wrote: > No, I meant ld(1). The problem here is that in the case when libc is > recorded before libc_r in dynamic dependencies list the resulting > executable may not work correctly (see my testcase). Patient: "Doctor, it hurts when I record libc before libc_r in the dynamic dependencies list!" Doctor: [expected response] 8-). Seriously, the "Evolution" build process is seriously broken; it works on Linux because Linux has a simple threads implementation, rather than an efficient one. -- Terry To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?3C63E961.45706408>