Date: Fri, 8 Feb 2002 17:25:03 +0200 From: Ruslan Ermilov <ru@FreeBSD.org> To: Terry Lambert <tlambert2@mindspring.com> Cc: Maxim Sobolev <sobomax@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: <20020208172503.H78163@sunbay.com> In-Reply-To: <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> <3C63E961.45706408@mindspring.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Fri, Feb 08, 2002 at 07:06:09AM -0800, Terry Lambert wrote: > 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. > Doctor's Assistant: "No library should ever have an explicit dependency on libc". Cheers, -- Ruslan Ermilov Sysadmin and DBA, ru@sunbay.com Sunbay Software AG, ru@FreeBSD.org FreeBSD committer, +380.652.512.251 Simferopol, Ukraine http://www.FreeBSD.org The Power To Serve http://www.oracle.com Enabling The Information Age 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?20020208172503.H78163>