[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <52D1C7EC.5090908@landley.net>
Date: Sat, 11 Jan 2014 16:38:36 -0600
From: Rob Landley <rob@...dley.net>
To: musl@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: Re: Re: libgcc --disable-shared test case
On 01/11/14 16:23, Rich Felker wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 11, 2014 at 04:04:25PM -0600, Rob Landley wrote:
> If you want to see the issue manifest without replacing uclibc, the
> easiest way would be to check *which* libgcc symbols got pulled into
> libc.so.0, then modify the test code for libfoo.so to use a feature
> that will pull in one of the libgcc symbols not in libc.
>
> Rich
My goal is to make it work, with a brick if necessary. This includes
making it all work under musl.
I'm already patching the libgcc.a build to produce libgcc_eh.a at
inappropriate times and shoehorning in symbols that problably shouldn't
go in there. (And then ccwrap is shoehorning in libgcc_eh.a when it
pulls in libgcc.a.)
My position on the --disable-shared gcc being subtly broken is that it's
a bug in gcc I should fix (at least until replacing one more FSF project
with something better). Generally if I can reproduce a problem and get
enough time to work on it, I can fix it. I just wanted to make sure that
my failure to reproduce this issue wasn't because I subtly screwed up. :)
Rob
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use?
Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia
and check out these
guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.
