This is the mail archive of the libc-hacker@sources.redhat.com mailing list for the glibc project.
Note that libc-hacker is a closed list. You may look at the archives of this list, but subscription and posting are not open.
| Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
|---|---|---|
| Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |
| Other format: | [Raw text] | |
Franz Sirl <Franz.Sirl-kernel@lauterbach.com> writes: |> On Monday 27 January 2003 22:38, Andreas Schwab wrote: |> > Franz Sirl <Franz.Sirl-kernel@lauterbach.com> writes: |> > |> Though note that this _requires_ binutils 2.13.90.0.4+ or 2.13.1+, |> > |> otherwise there will be really strange interactions with gcc. |> > |> > In which way? |> |> Earlier binutils doesn't correctly link together 2 shared libs (libgcc.so and |> libc.so in this case) which have the same version of a symbol, but aren't |> both linktime references. The PPC solution was only possible after hjl fixed |> a few binutils bugs. The fixes went into 2.13.90.4 and 2.13.1. IIRC the best |> case was binutils refusing to link glibc with some strange error message, |> but I think it was also possible to get a corrupted libc.so. I don't think this is an issue since glibc is using -static-libgcc. Andreas. -- Andreas Schwab, SuSE Labs, schwab@suse.de SuSE Linux AG, Deutschherrnstr. 15-19, D-90429 Nürnberg Key fingerprint = 58CA 54C7 6D53 942B 1756 01D3 44D5 214B 8276 4ED5 "And now for something completely different."
| Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
|---|---|---|
| Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |