New verson of CLiB2 from Andrea (afxgroup)

	Bottom Previous Topic Next Topic
Register To Post

« 1 ... 6 7 8 (9)

afxgroup

Re: New verson of CLiB2 from Andrea (afxgroup)

Posted on: 2023/7/4 11:54 #161

Amigans Defender

I don't remember if new elf.library is needed (too many changes).. BTW .so or .a are the same. They are just stubs call to .library. So you will not see any difference using .a or .so

i'm really tired...

kas1e

Re: New verson of CLiB2 from Andrea (afxgroup)

Posted on: 2023/7/4 12:26 #162

Home away from home

I mean after we have real shared clib2.library, do we need to provide any .so at all with clib2, be it stubs or whatever. I mean after clib2.library done, there no needs for libc.so anymore

Join us to improve dopus5!
AmigaOS4 on youtube

joerg

Re: New verson of CLiB2 from Andrea (afxgroup)

Posted on: 2023/7/4 15:31 #163

Just can't stay away

@afxgroup
Quote:

BTW .so or .a are the same. They are just stubs call to .library. So you will not see any difference using .a or .so

Of course there is a difference, even if the contents are identical. If you use dynamic linking for example with libgcc.so, or any other shared object using the shared C library which depends on the clib2 stubs it will only work with a libclib2.so but not if you link with a libclib2.a instead.

@kas1e
Quote:

I mean after we have real shared clib2.library, do we need to provide any .so at all with clib2, be it stubs or whatever. I mean after clib2.library done, there no needs for libc.so anymore

Even if libclib2.a and libclib2.so are only stubs calling clib2.library functions they are still required, just like the newlib libc.a and libc.so are required for newlib.library.

But of course the clib2 shared object stubs library can't use the soname libc.so since that's the incompatible newlib shared object stubs shared object library already.

afxgroup

Re: New verson of CLiB2 from Andrea (afxgroup)

Posted on: 2023/7/4 17:07 #164

Amigans Defender

@joerg

Quote:

Of course there is a difference, even if the contents are identical. If you use dynamic linking for example with libgcc.so, or any other shared object using the shared C library which depends on the clib2 stubs it will only work with a libclib2.so but not if you link with a libclib2.a instead.

Of course. I know this. I mean that if someone wants to use .so (using dynld) feel free to do so. Since there are no difference using libc.a (and so shared objects) instead.
It is just a choice. If someone wants to use shared objects it can do this. It is like we do with newlib now. No difference

i'm really tired...

joerg

Re: New verson of CLiB2 from Andrea (afxgroup)

Posted on: 2023/7/4 17:15 #165

Just can't stay away

@afxgroup
Quote:

Of course. I know this. I mean that if someone wants to use .so (using dynld) feel free to do so. Since there are no difference using libc.a (and so shared objects) instead.
It is just a choice. If someone wants to use shared objects it can do this. It is like we do with newlib now. No difference

With a shared clib2.library most software should now use static linking, but for example software using plugins with dlopen(), etc. can still only work if it's dynamically linked with the .so instead.
Just like with newlib, no difference.

Register To Post	« 1 ... 6 7 8 (9)
	Top Previous Topic Next Topic

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 ( 0 members and 1 Anonymous Users )