bb 1.1.0 fais to build fancy sort applet
Peter S. Mazinger
ps.m at gmx.net
Tue Jan 24 11:05:52 UTC 2006
On Mon, 23 Jan 2006, Rob Landley wrote:
> On Monday 23 January 2006 17:02, Peter S. Mazinger wrote:
> > > > | :sort.c:(.text+0x389): undefined reference to `__isnan'
> > > > | :sort.c:(.text+0x39c): undefined reference to `__isnan'
> > > > | :sort.c:(.text+0x3b5): undefined reference to `__isnan'
> > > > | :sort.c:(.text+0x3d1): undefined reference to `__isinf'
> > > > | :sort.c:(.text+0x3f3): undefined reference to `__isinf'
> > > > | :sort.c:(.text+0x424): undefined reference to `__isinf'
> > > > | :sort.c:(.text+0x455): undefined reference to `__isinf'
> > > > |
> > > > | collect2: ld returned 1 exit status
> >
> > for some reason glibc has these in libc.so, not libm.so, uClibc in libm.so
>
> Yeah, I figured that out.
>
> Do you have a suggestion what we should do about the libm dependency?
>
> It's easy enough to add the dependency to the Makefile. (Patch attached.)
> And people building against glibc aren't exactly going for the world's
> smallest /lib directory.
>
> The problem is, for glibc this takes a 9k app and adds an unnecessary
> dependency on 130k library. And although the man page indicates that this
> is needed, I just tested the build on my Red Hat 7.3 image and it compiled
> and ran against glibc (2.2.5) just fine, without needing -libm. So the man
> page hasn't matched reality for at least four years.
>
> Is there some standard here?
>
> Rob
The uClibc libm implementation is basically SunPro version, due to the
fact, that uClibc provides an option to disable libm completely, it is
"normal" to have it in libm and not libc.
dietlibc has these 2 added to libc.
Manuel/Erik?
--
Peter S. Mazinger <ps dot m at gmx dot net> ID: 0xA5F059F2
Key fingerprint = 92A4 31E1 56BC 3D5A 2D08 BB6E C389 975E A5F0 59F2
More information about the busybox
mailing list