On 3/4/11 2:54 AM, devzero2000 wrote: > On Thu, Mar 3, 2011 at 9:09 PM, Mark Hatle <mark.ha...@windriver.com> wrote: >> On 3/3/11 2:00 PM, Jeff Johnson wrote: >>> >>> On Mar 3, 2011, at 2:54 PM, Mark Hatle wrote: >>> >>>> On 3/3/11 1:44 PM, Jeff Johnson wrote: >>>>> Hmmm ... I'l try, but I'll bet that both >>>>> beecrypt and syck are external in this bug report. >>>>> >>>> >>>> (See above, it's internal) >>> >>> If its internal, then BeeCrypt/syck are in -lrpmmisc and >>> the fix needs to be spun slightly differently. >> >> My understanding is that rpmmisc has a reference to the libbeecrypt.so, but >> it >> doesn't contain a copy of it. It's this referencing that is breaking on >> newer >> systems. If you don't include both the reference and implementation when >> linking the final executable, newer versions of the linker will intentionally >> fail to link. (There is an --as-needed flag that can be added to the link >> line.. this will revert the linker behavior to the old way of bringing in >> libraries "as needed" based on run-time references.) >> >>> Note that the patch has been put in and taken out >>> a couple times already. RSE's intent was >>> to strip all external library linkages and >>> then use -lrpmmisc as a staging area for >>> internal <-> external. >>> >>> But s modern tool chains start to try to mininimize >>> library linkages, well, it gets tricky to keep everyone >>> happy. >>> >>> I'll either apply the quick-and-dirty path again or try >>> to figger what isn't right. Its likely linker stoopidness >>> with transitive dependencies not exposing "unneeded" symbols. > > Hi, perhaps useful but these links describe the ChangeInImplicitDSOLinking > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/ChangeInImplicitDSOLinking > and UnderstandingDSOLinkChange > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/UnderstandingDSOLinkChange > for FC13. I have to check if UBUNTU 11.04 have this change in binutils > but Mandriva > cooker DOESN'T have it (checked now). I have to check also RHEL6 last > update, probably not. > > Is this the problem perhaps ?
Whats odd is that we don't appear to be having any problems on FC13 -- only Ubuntu 11.04-alpha. --Mark > >>> >>> todo++. >>> >>> 73 de jeff >>> >>> ______________________________________________________________________ >>> RPM Package Manager http://rpm5.org >>> Developer Communication List rpm-devel@rpm5.org >> >> ______________________________________________________________________ >> RPM Package Manager http://rpm5.org >> Developer Communication List rpm-devel@rpm5.org >> ______________________________________________________________________ RPM Package Manager http://rpm5.org Developer Communication List rpm-devel@rpm5.org
