Re: Multiple definition of __memcpy_chk

[Mike Frysinger <vapier at gentoo dot org>]

On Friday, August 19, 2011 01:11:17 Bryan Ischo wrote:
> On 08/18/11 21:27, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > On Thursday, August 18, 2011 23:57:30 Bryan Ischo wrote:
> >> On 08/18/11 20:45, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> >>> On Thursday, August 18, 2011 18:15:23 Bryan Ischo wrote:
> >>>> Then when I go to compile gcc, it tries to compile and link libssp,
> >>>> and that also defines its own __memcpy_chk.
> >>> 
> >>> your gcc is misconfigured.  dont enable libssp for glibc builds.
> >> 
> >> Care to explain?  Why is it misconfigured?  Why can't libssp be compiled
> >> against a static libc?  Is there a reason beyond "both glibc and gcc
> >> have chosen the same name for a symbol"?
> > 
> > libssp makes no sense with glibc.  its symbols are provided by glibc
> > already.
> 
> Thank you for your response.  So are you saying that any system that is
> expected to use glibc as its C runtime library should not enable libssp
> when compiling gcc?  In what situation would someone enable libssp in gcc?

glibc isnt the only C library out there
-mike

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.