On Thu, 31 Oct 2002, Max Khon wrote:
> hi, there!
>
> On Thu, Oct 31, 2002 at 12:39:10AM -0800, David O'Brien wrote:
>
> > > Considering that I built the same applications and ran the same applications
> > > fine a while ago, and we've had a binutils upgrade, and things don't break
> > > on other systems, I'm inclined to assume there are linker bugs afoot, and
> > > all the other speculative stuff seems to be based on misunderstandings or
> > > bad information.
> >
> > Huh? Your statement is rather speculative stuff. Other systems (say
> > Linux) are using the same linker we are. Please speculate less. Please
> > grab an older ld and try to prove your speculation.
>
> I think the problem is in our dynamic linker or in the way we link
> dynamic libraries or in the way we compile and link X11 libraries.
> Linux also has pthreads symbols weakly defined
> (some of them are defined in glibc, some of them in libpthread)
> and does not have such problems.
I think you are mistaken. On my RedHat 8.0 system, there are weak
pthread_* symbols in libc.so and strong ones in libpthread.so. Linux
doesn't use libXThrStub.so, presumably because libc.so's pthread_* symbols
are suitable stubs.
--
Doug Rabson Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Phone: +44 20 8348 6160
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
