[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Fri, 28 Aug 2015 18:39:32 +0700
From: Рысь <lynx@...server.ru>
To: musl@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: Re: Adjustments to roadmap
On Fri, 28 Aug 2015 09:24:22 +0200
u-wsnj@...ey.se wrote:
> > I don't think the status quo is a reasonable option. We should
> > either teach GCC that musl targets don't support symbol versioning,
> > and make sure apps/libs' build systems detect this, or we should
> > make them work. My leaning is towards the latter.
>
> I'd rather prefer the former. Otherwise supporting an approach chosen
> for unrelated reasons somewhere else imposes a certain complexity
> cost on musl and on any packager/integrator who does not need
> versioning.
>
> Rune
>
I agree with this too. What are the real reasons raised to reconsider
support for symbol versioning? How other not glibc build environments
currently handle them?
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use?
Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia
and check out these
guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.
