This is the mail archive of the libc-hacker@sourceware.cygnus.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: the setrlimit changes in glibc 2.1.3

To: Cristian Gafton <gafton at redhat dot com>
Subject: Re: the setrlimit changes in glibc 2.1.3
From: "H . J . Lu" <hjl at lucon dot org>
Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2000 20:21:23 -0800
Cc: libc-hacker at sourceware dot cygnus dot com
References: <200001122252.XAA00590@delius.kettenis.local> <Pine.LNX.4.10.10001121843250.12491-100000@alien.devel.redhat.com>

On Wed, Jan 12, 2000 at 06:44:33PM -0500, Cristian Gafton wrote:
> On Wed, 12 Jan 2000, Mark Kettenis wrote:
> 
> >  * If you now link against your shared library you get a warning about
> >    setrlimit@@GLIBC_2.0 undefined.
> 
> It's an error.
> 
> > Then either something went wrong during your built of glibc 2.1.3, or
> > there is a bug in the (static) linker.  To check what is really you
> > could do
> > 
> >    nm /lib/libc-2.1.3.so | grep setrlimit
> > 
> > This should output at least two lines looking like
> > 
> >    xxxxxxxx T setrlimit@@GLIBC_2.1.3
> >    xxxxxxxx T setrlimit@GLIBC_2.0
> > 
> > If this is not the case, something went wrong when buildig glibc
> > 2.1.3.  Otherwise it is most likely a linker bug.
> 
> I _do_ get that. The problem is that setrlimit@GLIBC_2.0 is different than
> the setrlimit@@GLIBC_2.0, which is what the liker expects to find.

Please send me a testcase. I will take a look. It sounds like a
linker bug to me.


H.J.

References:
- Re: the setrlimit changes in glibc 2.1.3
  - From: Mark Kettenis
- Re: the setrlimit changes in glibc 2.1.3
  - From: Cristian Gafton

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