Missing dependencies on shared libraries
Daniel Eischen
deischen at freebsd.org
Sat Apr 15 18:16:08 UTC 2006
On Sat, 15 Apr 2006, M. Warner Losh wrote:
> In message: <Pine.GSO.4.64.0604151358210.9220 at sea.ntplx.net>
> Daniel Eischen <deischen at freebsd.org> writes:
> : On Sat, 15 Apr 2006, M. Warner Losh wrote:
> :
> : > In message: <Pine.GSO.4.64.0604141439280.3685 at sea.ntplx.net>
> : > Daniel Eischen <deischen at freebsd.org> writes:
> : > : On Fri, 14 Apr 2006, Victor Balada Diaz wrote:
> : > :
> : > : > Hi,
> : > : > I found that ldd doesn't report libc as a dependency on most (all?)
> : > : > libraries:
> : > : >
> : > : > pato> ldd /usr/lib/libfetch.so
> : > : > /usr/lib/libfetch.so:
> : > : > libssl.so.3 => /usr/lib/libssl.so.3 (0x4816a000)
> : > : > libcrypto.so.3 => /lib/libcrypto.so.3 (0x48198000)
> : > : >
> : > : > does anyone know why?
> : > :
> : > : AFAIK, it's being worked on. It's not just libc either, -pthread
> : > : also has to start linking to libpthread.
> : >
> : > We don't record libc dependencies into shared libraries right now. If
> : > we did, that would create some problems and solve some problems. With
> : > symbol versioning, it most likely will become moot, since we'll never
> : > have to bump libc major version again...
> :
> : kan stated he was working on doing this, which is what I was
> : referring to above.
>
> That makes sense. If you explicitly include libc on the command line
> to build the library, it is included...
Here's the link to his original reply to -current. Also, if you
look at linux shared libraries, you'll note they have dependencies
to libc.
$ readelf -d /usr/compat/linux/lib/libpthread.so.0
Dynamic segment at offset 0x15128 contains 24 entries:
Tag Type Name/Value
0x00000001 (NEEDED) Shared library: [libc.so.6]
0x0000000e (SONAME) Library soname: [libpthread.so.0]
...
http://docs.freebsd.org/cgi/getmsg.cgi?fetch=884395+0+archive/2006/freebsd-current/20060212.freebsd-current
--
DE
More information about the freebsd-hackers
mailing list