This is the mail archive of the gcc@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GCC project.

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]

Re: GNU/Linux vs. libtool --no-undefined

To: schwab at suse dot de
Subject: Re: GNU/Linux vs. libtool --no-undefined
From: Mark Mitchell <mark at codesourcery dot com>
Date: Tue, 06 Feb 2001 10:11:08 -0800
Cc: fjh at cs dot mu dot oz dot au, gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org
Organization: CodeSourcery, LLC
References: <jebssgkl77.fsf@hawking.suse.de><20010207024456.A10994@venus.cs.mu.oz.au><jeu2673iwq.fsf@hawking.suse.de>

>>>>> "Andreas" == Andreas Schwab <schwab@suse.de> writes:

    Andreas> Sounds like a linker bug, since ld-linux.so.2 does already get linked in
    Andreas> via DT_NEEDED.

Bummer.  Using -no-undefined would have been a very good way to make
sure that the V3 library was not accidentally leaving things
uninstantiated.  Perhaps somebody on this list would fix the linker
bug, so that in the future we can do this?

The good news is that now that we've turned off implicit instantiation
in the library, and problems in this area will probably turn up when
you run `make check-g++', even on a system with weak symbols, as there
will be unresolved symbols at run-time.

Thanks for the information,

--
Mark Mitchell                   mark@codesourcery.com
CodeSourcery, LLC               http://www.codesourcery.com

References:
- Re: GNU/Linux vs. libtool --no-undefined
  - From: Andreas Schwab
- Re: GNU/Linux vs. libtool --no-undefined
  - From: Fergus Henderson
- Re: GNU/Linux vs. libtool --no-undefined
  - From: Andreas Schwab

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]