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: AS17314 8.43.84.0/22 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.2 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,DKIM_VALID_EF,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS shortcircuit=no autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 Received: from sourceware.org (server2.sourceware.org [8.43.85.97]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 16B2B1F8C6 for ; Tue, 27 Jul 2021 20:20:06 +0000 (UTC) Received: from server2.sourceware.org (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3ED44393AC0E for ; Tue, 27 Jul 2021 20:20:05 +0000 (GMT) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 3ED44393AC0E DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=sourceware.org; s=default; t=1627417205; bh=KGqkrjtfAkvcI0FQ1Na4GHJ5pCxnztmXl9OfG6bxhtY=; h=To:Subject:References:Date:In-Reply-To:List-Id:List-Unsubscribe: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Help:List-Subscribe:From:Reply-To:Cc: From; b=pBUuWjFrXNwuKQOjEdQGvIIM3ZAgf9h1lugEW/EChFtZYfY7jZQOFgG+zmyBumVYU t/ko0dE2Fq1ZjbLGEae5PLTvIqN+OATFtB1Bx7qcM9IbQ+Y2vwLyqJlh4/LV4SadNL KwPExj6zanowhdXPVb0OS5z0tYmS+7QjrOghAZKI= Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com [170.10.133.124]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 698D8383D01B for ; Tue, 27 Jul 2021 20:19:45 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.1 sourceware.org 698D8383D01B Received: from mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (mimecast-mx01.redhat.com [209.132.183.4]) (Using TLS) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP id us-mta-278-KXZXcZwWPV-VSOX6y8FF-Q-1; Tue, 27 Jul 2021 16:19:43 -0400 X-MC-Unique: KXZXcZwWPV-VSOX6y8FF-Q-1 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx02.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.12]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B980A3E741; Tue, 27 Jul 2021 20:19:42 +0000 (UTC) Received: from oldenburg.str.redhat.com (ovpn-112-7.ams2.redhat.com [10.36.112.7]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 257B860C9D; Tue, 27 Jul 2021 20:19:37 +0000 (UTC) To: Joseph Myers Subject: Re: Undefined use of weak symbols in gnulib References: <87o8e0p92r.fsf@oldenburg.str.redhat.com> <1680226.UWtE2gOZdF@omega> <87a6piluow.fsf@oldenburg.str.redhat.com> <1882380.6EOZElgKgl@omega> Date: Tue, 27 Jul 2021 22:19:35 +0200 In-Reply-To: (Joseph Myers's message of "Tue, 27 Jul 2021 20:02:51 +0000") Message-ID: <877dhbbjc8.fsf@oldenburg.str.redhat.com> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.2 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.79 on 10.5.11.12 X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com Content-Type: text/plain X-BeenThere: libc-alpha@sourceware.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Libc-alpha mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , From: Florian Weimer via Libc-alpha Reply-To: Florian Weimer Cc: libc-alpha@sourceware.org, bug-gnulib@gnu.org, Bruno Haible Errors-To: libc-alpha-bounces+e=80x24.org@sourceware.org Sender: "Libc-alpha" * Joseph Myers: > On Sat, 17 Jul 2021, Bruno Haible wrote: > >> 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 think LIBPTHREAD_SO is really for use with dlopen (followed by e.g. > using dlsym to look up a function by name at runtime), not linking against > (in general you need to link against the *.so name which might be a linker > script, not directly against the shared library's SONAME). > > So if there's any change regarding LIBPTHREAD_SO, I think the natural one > would be to define it to LIBC_SO (I hope the dlopen/dlsym case works > regardless of whether that change is made or not). That is in an interesting idea. I like it. It doesn't help with Bruno's use case, detecting the integrated libpthread with the preprocessor. Carlos, do you think we can still slip in a definition of PTHREAD_IN_LIBC in (for __USE_GNU)? Thanks, Florian