Hmm.  If the weak declaration is still in that file, then the patch was
_not_ applied.  Here's what the section of code looks like on my system
after all the patches are put on:

const int __old_sys_nerr = OLD_ERRLIST_SIZE;

strong_alias (__old_sys_nerr, _old_sys_nerr);
compat_symbol (libc, __old_sys_nerr, _sys_nerr, GLIBC_2_0);
compat_symbol (libc, _old_sys_nerr, sys_nerr, GLIBC_2_0);
strong_alias (__old_sys_errlist, _old_sys_errlist);
compat_symbol (libc, __old_sys_errlist, _sys_errlist, GLIBC_2_0);
compat_symbol (libc, _old_sys_errlist, sys_errlist, GLIBC_2_0);
#endif

strong_alias (__new_sys_nerr, _new_sys_nerr)
versioned_symbol (libc, __new_sys_nerr, _sys_nerr, GLIBC_2_1);
versioned_symbol (libc, _new_sys_nerr, sys_nerr, GLIBC_2_1);
strong_alias (__new_sys_errlist, _new_sys_errlist)
versioned_symbol (libc, __new_sys_errlist, _sys_errlist, GLIBC_2_1);
versioned_symbol (libc, _new_sys_errlist, sys_errlist, GLIBC_2_1);



No weak alias definitions at all.


Mark Post

-----Original Message-----
From: Rick Troth [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, January 08, 2003 5:16 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: stuck on the staged [re]build


> Perhaps so, but if I were you, I'd visually inspect the
> errlist.c file, just to be sure.

I did.
Swapping the "strong" and "weak" declaration *seems* to let it build.
But I then ran into other errors,  so it will be some time before I
will know if that fixes it.   Also,  I really had hoped to do this
without local source code tweaks.   Also also,  the  "stage 1"
build of GLIBC works okay,  so what is the difference?

Film at 11.

-- RMT

Reply via email to