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 2C9A61F5AE for ; Sat, 17 Jul 2021 14:39:07 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost ([::1]:52362 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1m4lT7-00037U-WB for normalperson@yhbt.net; Sat, 17 Jul 2021 10:39:06 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:36940) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1m4lT4-00036F-Ui for bug-gnulib@gnu.org; Sat, 17 Jul 2021 10:39:03 -0400 Received: from mo4-p00-ob.smtp.rzone.de ([81.169.146.161]:32127) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1m4lT3-0006cl-0N for bug-gnulib@gnu.org; Sat, 17 Jul 2021 10:39:02 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; t=1626532736; 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=NwwlmfE2WVVakRaK2HI6sGw9pp+L5AdQ28gr3gKns8s=; b=qHYGef8EWX2msfpO8jpNERQUa5Yh/ue8jXfiO2NPWe3wx3bpYd9Qn4bRPqddeZHxtx o+KndFIaR62k9rIQ332x5GyaK1G+nDFVMH+I/zI6MJ+v5xD4mfaabr42hjc04cUAZCcM iJ9YxbYcnZptTFfjjnY/N+i1MCotWgYnYayWQp+x7pYXwPef3TND+zg7/f0fYULFmQzm qlia9duwn3wTAcnvMYGYIpq3UMhK4/63CRdoaUCW6tVQ+4W6h/5WH9xkzppK8pU5MBZp VMVTOZEDZt3GUB0OglT8KeryItL+hkwOiC0jGjomN7oXksYCje6F5BH+YDoPEdgUQQhj prvQ== 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 u08ae3x6HEcuFCL (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 16:38:56 +0200 (CEST) From: Bruno Haible To: Florian Weimer , libc-alpha@sourceware.org Subject: Re: Undefined use of weak symbols in gnulib Date: Sat, 17 Jul 2021 16:38:55 +0200 Message-ID: <1882380.6EOZElgKgl@omega> User-Agent: KMail/5.1.3 (Linux/4.4.0-210-generic; KDE/5.18.0; x86_64; ; ) In-Reply-To: <87a6piluow.fsf@oldenburg.str.redhat.com> References: <87o8e0p92r.fsf@oldenburg.str.redhat.com> <1680226.UWtE2gOZdF@omega> <87a6piluow.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=81.169.146.161; envelope-from=bruno@clisp.org; helo=mo4-p00-ob.smtp.rzone.de X-Spam_score_int: -27 X-Spam_score: -2.8 X-Spam_bar: -- X-Spam_report: (-2.8 / 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_LOW=-0.7, 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 Errors-To: bug-gnulib-bounces+normalperson=yhbt.net@gnu.org Sender: "bug-gnulib" Florian Weimer wrote on 2021-04-28: > However, you should really remove those weak symbol > hacks. They won't have any effect for glibc 2.34 I'm trying to do this now. But what is the right condition? 1) I understand that it's only for glibc >= 2.34 on Linux (NPTL), right? Not on Hurd (HTL)? 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? Bruno