This is the mail archive of the libc-help@sourceware.org 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] |
Other format: | [Raw text] |
On Friday, August 19, 2011 01:11:17 Bryan Ischo wrote: > On 08/18/11 21:27, Mike Frysinger wrote: > > On Thursday, August 18, 2011 23:57:30 Bryan Ischo wrote: > >> On 08/18/11 20:45, Mike Frysinger wrote: > >>> On Thursday, August 18, 2011 18:15:23 Bryan Ischo wrote: > >>>> Then when I go to compile gcc, it tries to compile and link libssp, > >>>> and that also defines its own __memcpy_chk. > >>> > >>> your gcc is misconfigured. dont enable libssp for glibc builds. > >> > >> Care to explain? Why is it misconfigured? Why can't libssp be compiled > >> against a static libc? Is there a reason beyond "both glibc and gcc > >> have chosen the same name for a symbol"? > > > > libssp makes no sense with glibc. its symbols are provided by glibc > > already. > > Thank you for your response. So are you saying that any system that is > expected to use glibc as its C runtime library should not enable libssp > when compiling gcc? In what situation would someone enable libssp in gcc? glibc isnt the only C library out there -mike
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |