Shared libgcc instead of static
Tue Nov 3 07:20:00 GMT 2015
On 03.11.2015 03.38, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> On 31 Oct 2015 22:20, Christer Solskogen wrote:
>> I'm having some fun trying to create a linux system that uses shared
>> libraries as much as possible, trying to avoid static ones.
>> glibc will fail without libgcc.a - even if libgcc.so is available. Is
>> there a technical reason for that?
> i'm assuming you don't actually mean "libgcc.so" but instead "libgcc_s.so".
Never assume something like that when the guy on the other side try
something adventurous like this :-) I tricked some other software to use
the shared libgcc instead of the static one by making a symlink from
libgcc_s.so to libgcc.a
> in which case you're assuming that libgcc_s.so has exactly the same set of
> exported functions as libgcc.a when that is not the case. some symbols are
> only provided by libgcc.a. these often come down to trade-offs in how the
> ABI is implemented.
That on the other hand, is correctly assumed, sir. And it answered by
question. Thanks! There's no way (yet!) to get rid of static libgcc.
More information about the Libc-help