Re: libgcc

[Nick Hudson <nick.hudson%gmx.co.uk@localhost>]

On Tuesday 08 December 2009 02:17:19 you wrote:
> > Would not be an issue if libc had a dependency recorded against the
> > shared libgcc, yes?
>
> I think so.
>
> And now I'm trying to understand the condition how libgcc is linked. 
> bsd.lib.mk makes libc.* get linked against libgcc_pic.a.  I can't
> understand the point;

IIRC (and I'm not sure I do) libgcc_pic.a is linked against libc in the same 
way as all other libraries to provide things like $$dyncall on hppa which 
isn't available anywhere else and needs to be included in the libc. It's also 
there just in case there are other similar functions on other architectures.

> what if libc.* has no undefined symbols that live in  libgcc_pic.a?

This is the common case and it means that nothing from libgcc_pic.a get pulled 
into libc. 

> I wonder if what it really meant was LDADD+=--whole-archive 
> -lgcc_pic.a...
>
> Masao

HTH,
Nick