From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-ASN: AS22989 209.51.188.0/24 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.7 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_INVALID, DKIM_SIGNED,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, NICE_REPLY_A,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED,RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4,RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL, SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 Received: from lists.gnu.org (lists.gnu.org [209.51.188.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 194001F5AE for ; Sat, 17 Jul 2021 16:39:42 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost ([::1]:57818 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1m4nLo-0007jq-PB for normalperson@yhbt.net; Sat, 17 Jul 2021 12:39:40 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:50220) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1m4nLm-0007ji-2E for bug-gnulib@gnu.org; Sat, 17 Jul 2021 12:39:38 -0400 Received: from mo4-p00-ob.smtp.rzone.de ([81.169.146.163]:15306) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1m4nLj-0002ok-Vc for bug-gnulib@gnu.org; Sat, 17 Jul 2021 12:39:37 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; t=1626539973; s=strato-dkim-0002; d=clisp.org; h=References:In-Reply-To:Message-ID:Date:Subject:Cc:To:From:Cc:Date: From:Subject:Sender; bh=1Ngg7WyuB/V+MW5fx/ZDIEVdXHd/vQDrsUJCGkIReGo=; b=oCqISWRW2A2Dy2GIlkmNRTQuebTcve7xXDwuIRP+z/fagrRs14DLpTsJdGbtDYwfoz uQisvbq5wVGtwcbBHv5mZbCIeW7GODQH4cpcFzJF+wflpEROvKr/c4tf+dq4spEg+auY YNTBx1jrhumxKeycHTrVq5aYj0R1DljcFRfl1w6V9pCJWz1FNKgC8B2bI7W/Vb+7LDQP NA8WeCSJnbSiDqEbvz1z+tMYK3EwWetYDZE2Hnb41HtfsLvyAcX+k25VuLLh0icB2Siu 43T08YbNbRMRPo+EqmKaxJTb/f4TsYjNuiE6aJAsGdGFoAMan7SjfFu5yNuUAbqoMoYa u5Ig== Authentication-Results: strato.com; dkim=none X-RZG-AUTH: ":Ln4Re0+Ic/6oZXR1YgKryK8brlshOcZlIWs+iCP5vnk6shH/DXj0JGsbh0vbrMZq" X-RZG-CLASS-ID: mo00 Received: from bruno.haible.de by smtp.strato.de (RZmta 47.28.1 DYNA|AUTH) with ESMTPSA id u08ae3x6HGdWFNO (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (curve X9_62_prime256v1 with 256 ECDH bits, eq. 3072 bits RSA)) (Client did not present a certificate); Sat, 17 Jul 2021 18:39:32 +0200 (CEST) From: Bruno Haible To: Florian Weimer Subject: Re: Undefined use of weak symbols in gnulib Date: Sat, 17 Jul 2021 18:39:32 +0200 Message-ID: <1690960.U8ZAqMrVH5@omega> User-Agent: KMail/5.1.3 (Linux/4.4.0-210-generic; KDE/5.18.0; x86_64; ; ) In-Reply-To: <87a6mlyopt.fsf@oldenburg.str.redhat.com> References: <87o8e0p92r.fsf@oldenburg.str.redhat.com> <1882380.6EOZElgKgl@omega> <87a6mlyopt.fsf@oldenburg.str.redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Received-SPF: none client-ip=81.169.146.163; envelope-from=bruno@clisp.org; helo=mo4-p00-ob.smtp.rzone.de X-Spam_score_int: -20 X-Spam_score: -2.1 X-Spam_bar: -- X-Spam_report: (-2.1 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, NICE_REPLY_A=-0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: bug-gnulib@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: Gnulib discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: bug-gnulib@gnu.org, libc-alpha@sourceware.org Errors-To: bug-gnulib-bounces+normalperson=yhbt.net@gnu.org Sender: "bug-gnulib" Hi Florian, > > 1) I understand that it's only for glibc >= 2.34 on Linux (NPTL), > > right? Not on Hurd (HTL)? > > Yes, Hurd hasn't been integrated. > > > 2) /usr/include/gnu/lib-names.h still defines LIBPTHREAD_SO. > > How about not defining LIBPTHREAD_SO, since linking with it is supposed > > to be a no-op in these newer glibc versions? > > I'm not sure if this is the right way, given that the file still exists > for all currently supported targets. Thanks for the rapid answers. > An alternative would be to add a macro to , such as > PTHREAD_IN_LIBC. This would be useful, yes. Like there is a that gives meta- information about functions that are stubs, it is useful to have a way to find out whether a library is a stub. For cross-compilation scenarios, implementing it through a macro in some header file is better than implementing it through some file in /lib/ on the file system. Bruno