Follow-up Comment #5, bug #29845 (project gnustep): > Ah ... so '-Wl,-z,defs -Wl,--as-needed' has a similar effect to '-Wl,--no-undefined'
Almost; -Wl,-z,defs is another way of writing -Wl,--no-undefined. > the fake main mechanism requires the gnustep_base_user_main() function to be > undefined as it is supplied by the program which is using gnsutep. Thanks... I never actually fully understood the fake-main thingy :-( So it's not a bug, I agree. > So this is more a package bug (building base with illegal linker flags) (You mean "invalid", "illegal" is something different and its use in this context is discourged by the GNU Coding Standards.) Yes, I agree the value of LDFLAGS is invalid for this platform, and it's a Debian packaging bug for defining it. > If there's a hurd specific way to obtain that info, we could change the configure.ac to > detect its presence and add code to use it instead of fake-main. Do you know of a > way to do it? IIRC one or two years ago there was a Hurd GSoC project for implementing a GNU/Linux-compatible procfs translator. AFAICS now, the code has been merged into the Hurd repository and is available in the Debian hurd(-dev) package. So my wild guess is that /proc on GNU/Hurd is not mounted by default, which is why the configure check fails. I can use --enable-procfs when configuring gnustep-base on this platform, but I have to recheck with the Hurd people if/how it is guaranteed to have /proc on a live user GNU/Hurd system, otherwise things may break at runtime. Many thanks for enlightening me. I suggest to close this bug; if it turns out there are other related issues I'll follow up accordingly. _______________________________________________________ Reply to this item at: <http://savannah.gnu.org/bugs/?29845> _______________________________________________ Message sent via/by Savannah http://savannah.gnu.org/ _______________________________________________ Bug-gnustep mailing list Bug-gnustep@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-gnustep