Date: Wed, 1 Dec 2021 23:42:21 -0600 From: Kyle Evans <kevans@freebsd.org> To: FreeBSD Current <freebsd-current@freebsd.org> Cc: Dimitry Andric <dim@freebsd.org>, Jessica Clarke <jrtc27@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: failure of pructl (atexit/_Block_copy/--no-allow-shlib-undefined) Message-ID: <CACNAnaEOmpuJX4yi%2BEFP2NLnv9srC4C5anmfO7mseG_HFfzy%2BA@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <20211202020326.GU35602@funkthat.com> References: <20211202020326.GU35602@funkthat.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, Dec 1, 2021 at 8:05 PM John-Mark Gurney <jmg@funkthat.com> wrote: > > Hello, > > It seems like the recent changes to make --no-allow-shlib-undefined > broke pructl. > > lib/libc/stdlib/atexit.c uses a weak _Block_copy symbol, but > pructl does not use atexit_b, and yet gets the following error: > : && /usr/bin/cc -Werror -O2 -pipe -fstack-protector-strong -isystem /usr/local/include -fno-strict-aliasing -std=c99 -fstack-protector-strong CMakeFiles/pructl.dir/pructl.c.o -o pructl -Wl,-rpath,/usr/local/lib: /usr/local/lib/libpru.so && : > ld: error: /lib/libc.so.7: undefined reference to _Block_copy [--no-allow-shlib-undefined] > cc: error: linker command failed with exit code 1 (use -v to see invocation) > > What is the correct fix? It seems like atexit.c or the linker should > be fixed, as pructl doesn't use atexit_b at all. > CC dim@ and jrtc27@... this seems like a toolchain regression? We're relying on the address of weak _Block_copy to simply evaluate to NULL if it's undefined here, which seems legit and pretty well-defined at this point from my recollection.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CACNAnaEOmpuJX4yi%2BEFP2NLnv9srC4C5anmfO7mseG_HFfzy%2BA>