From: kaz K. <kk...@rr...> - 2003-05-07 01:09:46
|
Daniel Jacobowitz <dr...@fa...> wrote: > At the risk of missing something obvious... why not put it in libc.so > and libc.a (not libc_nonshared.a) directly if all you want is for it to > be unique in the executable? There is always exactly one copy of libc > loaded, and everything should be dynamically linked to it except for > ld.so. But some shared libraries can be made without libc, can't be? -z defs issue remains for them. Of course, we can treat them as the exceptions, but it seems to me it's not essentially different with the current crt1.o implementation. Regards, kaz |