| 1 |
2016-06-14 17:28 GMT+08:00 Luca Barbato <lu_zero@g.o>: |
| 2 |
> On 14/06/16 11:17, Lei Zhang wrote: |
| 3 |
>> 2016-06-14 17:12 GMT+08:00 Luca Barbato <lu_zero@g.o>: |
| 4 |
>>> On 14/06/16 10:28, Lei Zhang wrote: |
| 5 |
>>>> 2016-06-14 16:10 GMT+08:00 Felix Janda <felix.janda@××××××.de>: |
| 6 |
>>>>> Take a look at the discussion at |
| 7 |
>>>>> |
| 8 |
>>>>> http://www.openwall.com/lists/musl/2014/04/15/3 |
| 9 |
>>>> |
| 10 |
>>>> And some view from the LLVM side: |
| 11 |
>>>> |
| 12 |
>>>> http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.compilers.clang.devel/46390 |
| 13 |
>>>> |
| 14 |
>>>> IMHO, the real problem is the abuse of _GNU_SOURCE by C++ compiler. |
| 15 |
>>>> The decisions made by LLVM and musl both look reasonable to me. |
| 16 |
>>>> |
| 17 |
>>> |
| 18 |
>>> -U_GNU_SOURCE would make you get through the problem for the time being? |
| 19 |
>>> |
| 20 |
>>> Given you aren't using libstdc++ in that case, assuming libcxx does not |
| 21 |
>>> have the need probably might be the easiest workaround. |
| 22 |
>> |
| 23 |
>> Unfortunately libc++ depends on this macro as well: |
| 24 |
>> |
| 25 |
>> http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/cfe-dev/2016-June/049447.html |
| 26 |
>> |
| 27 |
>> I'm imagining some ugly hacks on LLVM now... |
| 28 |
>> |
| 29 |
> |
| 30 |
> Please try to prepare a list and blog about this problem since possibly |
| 31 |
> needs additional awareness. |
| 32 |
> |
| 33 |
> If the symbols needed aren't GNU-only there are other macros to expose |
| 34 |
> them (and the llvm people just went the lazy route to get them). |
| 35 |
|
| 36 |
I agree. It seems libstdc++ is also taking the lazy route, and someone |
| 37 |
intended to fix it: |
| 38 |
|
| 39 |
https://lwn.net/Articles/590504/ |
| 40 |
|
| 41 |
but I see no progress so far. |
| 42 |
|
| 43 |
|
| 44 |
Lei |
Archives