On Thu, 31 Oct 2002 09:08:12 -0500 (EST) Daniel Eischen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Cool. Then let's be consistent and follow Solaris all the way. Libc > > on Solaris provides full set of pthread_? functions which in turn > > call weakly defined _pthread_?? counterparts. libpthread in turn > > provides strong definitions for _pthread_??. > > No, please see earlier messages in this thread. > Dan, could you please be consistent? You cited Solaris as an example against making all the symbols in libc_r strong. I gave you an answer that the only way why this works on Solaris is because libc itself provides weak pthread_ definitions. pthread_ functions in libc simply call their _pthread counterparts, which are also weekly defined in libc. libpthread defines _pthread_ symbols as strong and consequently its symbols override one provided by libc. Saying 'NO' to strong symbols in libc_r because Solaris does not do that and then saying 'NO' again to description on how Solaris really does things - that's where I lost you. -- Alexander Kabaev To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
