[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Forcing static link of libstdc++

From: Stefan Puiu
Subject: Re: Forcing static link of libstdc++
Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2006 19:58:44 +0300

(posting this to the list, too)

Hi, I'm actually glad you replied.

On 9/26/06, Mike Melanson <address@hidden> wrote:

1) Having 2 binaries would immediately double the QA effort.

Yes, but also making sure the flash plugin can statically link with
libstdc++ increased your development effort quite a bit. And if Ralf
is correct about the symbol clashes that you can experience because of
the way ELF works, I think you agree that the QA extra effort in this
case would also increase. Only the troubleshooting involved would be
more difficult , and if you have problems with ELF symbol resolution,
all the hacks you've ahd to go through would be useless.

I remember reading something about ELF symbol resolution in this
document written by Ulrich Drepper: It explains how symbols
are resolved - try reading the relevant sections (especially where the
way the ELF scope when looking up a symbol is explained) and seeing if
might cause problems to you. I think that's what Ralf was referring
to. In the worst case, you are looking at really unpredictable
behaviour, and I don't think you want to have to deal with that.

2) So far, there is only one version of gcc that can compile the Flash
Player and it is tied to libstdc++ v6.

We've been using gcc-3.3 for quite a while and when moving to 4.0 I
found out that the latter is a lot less permissive - usually stuff
that compiles with 3.3 will break on 4.0, because of two-phase lookup.
Is it something two-phase lookup related? Is it only in one part of
the code, and reproducible in a small program?


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]