This is the mail archive of the mailing list for the glibc project.

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

Re: Problem with removing atexit.

On Tue, May 01, 2001 at 09:20:56AM -0700, H . J . Lu wrote:
> On Tue, May 01, 2001 at 11:52:45AM -0400, Ben Collins wrote:
> > > 
> > > Now, the question is, do we provide backward binary compatibility to
> > > DSOs built against glibc 2.0.x? Any comments?
> > 
> > This seems to be the same problem I ran into on non-i386, with a gcc
> > that didn't have the weaksym patch. It's not a compatibility problem,
> > it's a bug in gcc. The DSO's need to be recompiled with a recent gcc
> > (2.95.4 from CVS, or gcc-3.x)
> If you have to recompile a DSO to work with glibc 2.2.3, it IS a
> compatibility issue. My question is, should we require people to
> recompile DSOs with a right gcc if they want to use glibc 2.2.3?
> I don't think we should. But I don't have a good solution at hand
> for this problem.

You have to recompile it only because it was compiled with a buggy gcc.
This isn't a compatibility issue any more than it is to not link with
-lc and thus not include libc_nonshared.a into libraries.

/  Ben Collins  --  ...on that fantastic voyage...  --  Debian GNU/Linux   \
`  --  --  '

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