home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Newsgroups: comp.unix.amiga
- Path: yak.nstn.ns.ca!ecicrl!dingus!news
- From: hamish@border.ocunix.on.ca (Hamish Macdonald)
- Subject: Re: dynamic linking under Linux/68k
- X-Newsreader: Gnus v5.0.9
- Sender: hamish@dingus.border.ocunix.on.ca
- Organization: The Linux Border
- Message-ID: <x6n34j3sca.fsf@dingus.border.ocunix.on.ca>
- References: <4kdrhl$346@mirv.unsw.edu.au>
- In-Reply-To: lester@cse.unsw.edu.au's message of 9 Apr 1996 14:17:25 GMT
- X-Nntp-Posting-Host: dingus.border.ocunix.on.ca
- Date: Thu, 11 Apr 1996 11:36:37 GMT
-
- >>>>> On 9 Apr 1996 14:17:25 GMT,
- >>>>> In message <4kdrhl$346@mirv.unsw.edu.au>,
- >>>>> lester@cse.unsw.edu.au (Lester Gock-Young) wrote:
-
- Lester> I'm using binutils-2.6, gcc-2.7.2, ld.so-1.7.12, libc-5.0.9
- Lester> installed over watchtower-fs.
-
- Lester> ld seems to insist on linking my hello world program against
- Lester> libc.a rather than libc.so.5, causing it to be 50-odd K
- Lester> stripped. In contrast, the same piece of code is 2.5K stripped
- Lester> under Linux/i386!! Intel code is not *that* much more
- Lester> efficient that Motorola code, surely ...
-
- Do you have a symbolic link called libc.so pointing to libc.so.5?
- This is required by the newer binutils (well, a link called libc.so to
- the library is required; whether it points to the library itself or
- the libc.so.5 link is your option).
-
- bash$ ls -l /usr/lib/libc.so*
- lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 24 Dec 31 13:48 /usr/lib/libc.so -> ../../lib/libc.so.5
-
- Lester> I then ran
-
- Lester> strings -a hello | grep lib
-
- Lester> and found no references to libc.so.5 or any other shared
- Lester> library. The Linux/i386 code had a reference to libc.so.5.
-
- You know, "ldd hello" is a lot better test:
-
- bash$ ldd /bin/sync /bin/bash
- /bin/sync:
- statically linked (ELF)
- /bin/bash:
- libncurses.so.3.0 => /lib/libncurses.so.3.0
- libc.so.5 => /lib/libc.so.5.2.18
-
-