On Sat, 15 Apr 2006, M. Warner Losh wrote:
In message: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Daniel Eischen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: : On Sat, 15 Apr 2006, M. Warner Losh wrote: : : > In message: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> : > Daniel Eischen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: : > : On Fri, 14 Apr 2006, Victor Balada Diaz wrote: : > : : > : > Hi, : > : > I found that ldd doesn't report libc as a dependency on most (all?) : > : > libraries: : > : > : > : > pato> ldd /usr/lib/libfetch.so : > : > /usr/lib/libfetch.so: : > : > libssl.so.3 => /usr/lib/libssl.so.3 (0x4816a000) : > : > libcrypto.so.3 => /lib/libcrypto.so.3 (0x48198000) : > : > : > : > does anyone know why? : > : : > : AFAIK, it's being worked on. It's not just libc either, -pthread : > : also has to start linking to libpthread. : > : > We don't record libc dependencies into shared libraries right now. If : > we did, that would create some problems and solve some problems. With : > symbol versioning, it most likely will become moot, since we'll never : > have to bump libc major version again... : : kan stated he was working on doing this, which is what I was : referring to above.That makes sense. If you explicitly include libc on the command line to build the library, it is included...
Here's the link to his original reply to -current. Also, if you look at linux shared libraries, you'll note they have dependencies to libc. $ readelf -d /usr/compat/linux/lib/libpthread.so.0 Dynamic segment at offset 0x15128 contains 24 entries: Tag Type Name/Value 0x00000001 (NEEDED) Shared library: [libc.so.6] 0x0000000e (SONAME) Library soname: [libpthread.so.0] ... http://docs.freebsd.org/cgi/getmsg.cgi?fetch=884395+0+archive/2006/freebsd-current/20060212.freebsd-current -- DE _______________________________________________ freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
