This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: Shared library annoyance with gcc-3_0-branch
- To: Gerald Pfeifer <pfeifer at dbai dot tuwien dot ac dot at>
- Subject: Re: Shared library annoyance with gcc-3_0-branch
- From: "H . J . Lu" <hjl at valinux dot com>
- Date: Mon, 19 Feb 2001 10:20:52 -0800
- Cc: "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm at xmission dot com>,Richard Henderson <rth at redhat dot com>,Mark Mitchell <mark at codesourcery dot com>, jbuck at synopsys dot COM,lucier at math dot purdue dot edu, gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org
- References: <m1u25r11yg.fsf@frodo.biederman.org> <Pine.BSF.4.33.0102191431300.35600-100000@taygeta.dbai.tuwien.ac.at>
On Mon, Feb 19, 2001 at 02:35:10PM +0100, Gerald Pfeifer wrote:
> On 19 Feb 2001, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
> > A shared libgcc looks necessary to resolve problems of it's being
> > linked in multiple times by a program. But for a shared libgcc to
> > work reliably it must be in /lib. So we need gcc's make install to
> > put it there with an appropriate version number.
>
> No. Here, for example, we install GCC from an account different than
> root.
>
> And even if we would install as root, `make install` should *not* do
> anything about /lib which is on a local disk, unlike the software which
> is installed on a file server for use by the whole network.
>
> Not all the world is GNU/Linux. And not all the world is a stand-alone
> machine.
>
At least GNU/Linux doesn't have the current libc fiasco in FreeBSD :-(.
--
H.J. Lu (hjl@valinux.com)