[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Old Index]
Re: Fix -static with -lpthread
In article <20100627211524.GA12852%netbsd.org@localhost>,
David Holland <dholland-tech%netbsd.org@localhost> wrote:
>On Sun, Jun 27, 2010 at 11:06:16PM +0200, Joerg Sonnenberger wrote:
> > > > > ...why not just reference it from crt0?
> > > >
> > > > Because it is an implementation detail of libc.
> > >
> > > It's not like crt0 and libc are really independent, and it would be a
> > > lot less gross that way...
> > They are mostly independent. crt0 has to pull in exit(3) from libc to be
> > standard compliant and there is no real way to avoid that.
>Well yes, so what's the problem?
> > I see no good justification for adding other requirements on the
> > interface just for the sake of static linkage.
>I see no good justification for attaching a mess to that requirement
>to avoid making it slightly wider.
>I suppose the proper solution is to make ld smarter.
Yes, but until that happens keeping the mess inside libc is probably
better than messing up crt0.
Main Index |
Thread Index |