This is the mail archive of the libc-alpha@sources.redhat.com mailing list for the glibc project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]

Re: Problematic linking between glibc and shared libgcc


Phil Edwards <pedwards@disaster.jaj.com> writes:

> On Mon, Feb 19, 2001 at 02:10:49AM -0700, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
> > > > 3. Install it undr /lib for Linux.
> > > 
> > > Yes, but not via gcc's "make install".
> > 
> > Why isn't libgcc installed in /lib for everyone?
> > Give me an example of a unix system where that isn't the right thing
> > to do and I'll reconsider.
> 
> Any Unix other than Linux.

I haven't seen an example yet, where you can't recompile, and install
an arbitrary C program on the system with gcc reboot and be certain
that everything will still work.
 
> By default, GCC is third-party extraneous software, to be installed locally.
> Any system administrator who has been through the process of upgrading knows
> to stay *out* of the system directories when installing extra software,
> because those areas are under control of the vendor.
> 
> Anything installed in those directories is likely to get completely removed
> when an upgrade is performed.  I for one do not care for the idea of having
> to reinstall local software after every upgrade.  With GCC's current setup,
> I know that /usr/local won't be touched by the vendors.  But the vendors
> are within their rights to expect that /usr, /lib, and /bin belong to them,
> and that /usr/local belongs to me.

The problem is this installs a half broken GCC.  In particular you the
can't compile any program with GCC, and have it run before /usr/local
is mounted.  As a secondary compiler on a unix system from a big
vendor this is likely sane breakage, but it is still installing a broken gcc.

If this was just about gcc it wouldn't be an issue.  But it is about
every program compiled with gcc.  And I don't like a compiler that
builds half broken programs.

You as the system administrator should know that by not putting
libgcc_s.so in /lib that you are deliberately installing a half broken
gcc.  And for your uses it probably isn't a problem.

Eric


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]