On 10/11/2009 11:41 AM, Kent Boortz wrote:
(F) The linker, it should know about GLIBC_PRIVATE, and search for
non private occurrences first, then if not found do another scan
for private ones?
No, GLIBC_PRIVATE is not very different from ABC_XYZ from the linker's
point-of-view. :-)
> (A) Red Hat, the "/usr/lib/libunwind.la" should not have ' -lc -lgcc'
> as a dependency, those are implicit and should never be in a
> ".la", except maybe when building the compiler/linker itself?
Maybe. Does hacking the libunwind.la fix it?
> (C) Intel, SuSE has the exact same content of "libunwind.la", but
> 'postdeps' contains a "-lm" before "-lc", so should icc/icpc "-v"
> on Red Hat?
You accidentally a part of the sentence, but anyway I do not think
sprinkling -lm's is the right solution.
> (G) Linux system devs, for defining that symbols twice?
That's very tricky indeed, but I think that part is fine as long as -lc
is never given on the command line.
Paolo
_______________________________________________
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/libtool
