URL:
<http://savannah.gnu.org/bugs/?func=detailitem&item_id=16276>
Summary: x86_64 link library paths are not correct when
specified as dependencies
Project: make
Submitted by: jdefranco
Submitted on: Wednesday 04/05/06 at 23:30
Severity: 3 - Normal
Item Group: Enhancement
Status: None
Privacy: Public
Assigned to: None
Open/Closed: Open
Component Version: None
Operating System: None
Fixed Release: None
_______________________________________________________
Details:
%% John DeFranco <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
jd> On x86_64 systems it would seem that the search path for
jd> link libraries should be : /lib64, /usr/lib64, /lib,
jd> /usr/lib, etc. If not you end up
jd> getting the 32 bit libraries included first and then a
jd> link error. For
jd> example (cut down to only include the pertinent segments):
jd> cc -g -o test o cl_rba_uds_test.o /usr/lib/libm.so \
jd> /usr/lib/libdl.so objs/linux/debug/cl_chain.o \
jd> -Lobjs/linux/debug -lmylib
jd> /usr/lib/libm.so: could not read symbols: File in wrong
jd> format collect2: ld returned 1 exit status
jd> In this case -lm and -ldl where sepecified as dependencies
jd> in the makefile. The proper path for /usr/lib/libm.so
jd> and /usr/lib/libdl.so should have been /usr/lib64/libm.so
jd> and /usr/lib64/libdl.so.
It's not clear to me how make should manage this. After all there are many
issues such as (a) cross-compilation, (b) different platforms using different
models for 64-bit support, etc.
I don't know that GNU make can really do much with this, from an
autoconf standpoint for example.
My first instinct is to say that it is up to your distribution provider to
configure GNU make properly for your system; if the default library search
path is not correct for that distribution then it should be their
responsibility to configure it properly.
That being said, it's not so easy to set up the default value for this path!
I've checked the code and there's no "configure" option or similar that can be
set when GNU make is built to override the default search path. Offering such
an option might well be an enhancement that would make sense to put into the
GNU make distribution.
Please file a bug against the GNU make project on the Savannah web site,
marked as either "Enhancement" or "Build/Install", so we don't lose track of
this.
_______________________________________________________
Reply to this item at:
<http://savannah.gnu.org/bugs/?func=detailitem&item_id=16276>
_______________________________________________
Message sent via/by Savannah
http://savannah.gnu.org/
_______________________________________________
Bug-make mailing list
Bug-make@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-make
