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=-4.0 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,HTML_MESSAGE, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,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 26BC61F4B4 for ; Mon, 5 Apr 2021 22:37:02 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost ([::1]:37044 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lTXq8-00077D-Ue for normalperson@yhbt.net; Mon, 05 Apr 2021 18:37:00 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:45482) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lTXq6-000777-Jg for bug-gnulib@gnu.org; Mon, 05 Apr 2021 18:36:58 -0400 Received: from mail-ot1-x32d.google.com ([2607:f8b0:4864:20::32d]:45913) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lTXpy-0004yn-9c for bug-gnulib@gnu.org; Mon, 05 Apr 2021 18:36:58 -0400 Received: by mail-ot1-x32d.google.com with SMTP id 91-20020a9d08640000b0290237d9c40382so12777973oty.12 for ; Mon, 05 Apr 2021 15:36:49 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=sc3d.org; s=google; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=zwA7kmJ8C53mX6YmR3KdYATMqU5S8bDaPqAP7LNv1Mw=; b=ZmHllUwKyhSAqjiC5OUV+S0hE58nofb7EHw2MFfjdFqayAlDok7mUafZSPQx44eOuA XotCPtQEd5wYoUm4tc//EeVxBrm+tQ3P/9csTRHgFvSxX4gj3QASp8SXEkJXUOqjXlvR +wyrtLCGfzdKyVKWBW2vQbp2qY+aUmE++209c= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to; bh=zwA7kmJ8C53mX6YmR3KdYATMqU5S8bDaPqAP7LNv1Mw=; b=OZfOA56QcbfPPCdwpSHiLG2R20WWswnfLZCvLdTbbHBHzUucFVmHlVF3x9Adjk2rx/ ftH5nKTT0XH/HRm3TunnfTo2I2UVnnXlNgpwCWI3xvdpzQkd+TgL7evLoetsnxTDOwBZ 5dGvnoph285aWUAbXxPUdODFswEWId1qqsKvGCfUMex2eTIBqE9N+gvtRIgXri1KZtB9 4KIFXZKpxqYrJQ0QlplhUBb0ftbfjJKBZ4M6PIDvPUQ+yKhEzr4IU5ySeb7/N4+Hf9ZQ jBTY0wyte3ygWFCrjQKWUfQPIuwLUWg1YXcRXo+bP/cJpEboY/vXTIvFyRgVPkUeJ8m/ Nn9Q== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM53110x/OiTAM01mJ1mRJP/l9Ple+qyWr5ax5YjEZcXty7utyltDX XdBAH9iwlhkLJ5/fo1ktDD+ZUMML3ui5kimoRx3NiTudZjE= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJw0I+A6bf9j8uovgHhlCXTiP+fVTXLvtL5BJEUyl0oix1AEgMjHMrlWf8AuQQHPz480+upGEClbBk17/q9UAZY= X-Received: by 2002:a9d:dc7:: with SMTP id 65mr23779043ots.46.1617662208430; Mon, 05 Apr 2021 15:36:48 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: In-Reply-To: From: Reuben Thomas Date: Mon, 5 Apr 2021 23:36:36 +0100 Message-ID: Subject: Re: Using relocatable-prog with relocatable libraries To: bug-gnulib Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000004cf05b05bf41558f" Received-SPF: pass client-ip=2607:f8b0:4864:20::32d; envelope-from=rrt@sc3d.org; helo=mail-ot1-x32d.google.com 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, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-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: , Errors-To: bug-gnulib-bounces+normalperson=yhbt.net@gnu.org Sender: "bug-gnulib" --0000000000004cf05b05bf41558f Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Mon, 5 Apr 2021 at 22:55, Reuben Thomas wrote: > > Have I missed something? I was surprised that I hadn't come across this > problem before, but I found that I've used relocatable-lib-lgpl before, b= ut > not relocatable-prog (because in fact I was working with an LGPLed > project). > The comment about "all the copies of relocatable.c" in progreloc.c is surely is clue, but I cannot see how more than one copy of relocatable.c is ever compiled=E2=80=A6 --=20 https://rrt.sc3d.org --0000000000004cf05b05bf41558f Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On Mon, 5 Apr 2021 at 22:55, Reuben Thomas <rrt@sc3d.org> wrote:

Have I missed something? I was surprised that I = hadn't come across this problem before, but I found that I've used = relocatable-lib-lgpl before, but not relocatable-prog (because in fact I wa= s working with an LGPLed project).=C2=A0

<= /div>
The comment about "all the copies of relocatab= le.c" in progreloc.c is surely is clue, but I cannot see how more than= one copy of relocatable.c is ever compiled=E2=80=A6

--
=
--0000000000004cf05b05bf41558f--