This is the mail archive of the libc-hacker@sources.redhat.com mailing list for the glibc project.

Note that libc-hacker is a closed list. You may look at the archives of this list, but subscription and posting are not open.

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

Re: <bits/libc-lock.h> and <bp-sym.h>

To: "H . J . Lu" <hjl at valinux dot com>
Subject: Re: <bits/libc-lock.h> and <bp-sym.h>
From: Greg McGary <greg at mcgary dot org>
Date: 17 Jul 2000 01:33:25 -0700
Cc: GNU C Library <libc-hacker at sourceware dot cygnus dot com>
References: <20000716202546.A5629@valinux.com>

"H . J . Lu" <hjl@valinux.com> writes:

> <bits/libc-lock.h> includes <bp-sym.h> and uses BP_SYM. But <bp-sym.h>
> is not found anywhere.

For what compilation does it fail?

There are three bits/libc-lock.h files:

	sysdeps/generic/bits/libc-lock.h
	sysdeps/mach/bits/libc-lock.h
	linuxthreads/sysdeps/pthread/bits/libc-lock.h

You must be referring to the linuxthreads one, since that's the
only one with BP_SYM & <bp-sym.h>.

The #include is well guarded, and should only happen in the context
where bp-sym.h can be found in sysdeps/generic/bp-sym.h:

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
...

#ifndef __NO_WEAK_PTHREAD_ALIASES
# ifdef weak_extern
#  if _LIBC
#   include <bp-sym.h>
#  else
#   define BP_SYM (sym) sym
#  endif

...
------------------------------------------------------------------------------

How did you get it to fail?  What host & target?

Greg

Follow-Ups:
- Re: <bits/libc-lock.h> and <bp-sym.h>
  - From: Jakub Jelinek

References:
- <bits/libc-lock.h> and <bp-sym.h>
  - From: H . J . Lu

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