Roland McGrath, le Tue 29 Mar 2011 15:34:45 -0700, a écrit : > > Well, the thing is: we need to patch a fair number of applications > > then (Xorg, gdb, ...) since the dependency used to be brought in > > automatically (even explicitly, in the case of libc.a), so it looked > > like it was a libc-provided feature. > > Well, it was. I'm just rethinking the decision made all those years ago. > It should certainly be made consistent between static and dynamic linking, > and the situation today is that even static linking makes the RPC libraries > an implicit part of the libc API.
Yes, that's why I was a priori thinking about adding it to the shared case. Samuel
