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
[email protected]
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-gnustep
