This is the mail archive of the
libc-alpha@sourceware.org
mailing list for the glibc project.
Re: Move new totalorder from libm to libc
On Dez 16 2019, Florian Weimer wrote:
> * Andreas Schwab:
>
>> On Dez 16 2019, Florian Weimer wrote:
>>
>>> * Gabriel F. T. Gomes:
>>>
>>>> On Sat, 14 Dec 2019, Florian Weimer wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>Should we define the new totalorder in libc, so that it is harder to
>>>>>get the wrong version at run time due to underlinking?
>>>>
>>>> I didn't understand how underlinking could cause a wrong version to be
>>>> selected. Isn't totalorder only provided by libm? Where would a user
>>>> program get the old version from? I can only imagine it getting undefined
>>>> references during link time.
>>>
>>> If you build a shared object with -shared, you won't get an undefined
>>> symbol error (with typical toolchains):
>>
>> What makes totalorder special in this regard?
>
> It has multiple versions on all architectures now.
exp; exp2; log; log2; pow have the same problem.
Andreas.
--
Andreas Schwab, schwab@linux-m68k.org
GPG Key fingerprint = 7578 EB47 D4E5 4D69 2510 2552 DF73 E780 A9DA AEC1
"And now for something completely different."