tags 341608 +patch thanks On Thu, Dec 01, 2005 at 10:49:11AM -0800, Russ Allbery wrote: > Michael Banck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > I guess one option would be to patch krb5 to add weak pragmas for > > _pthread_mutex_lock et al. The other option would be to change > > libpthread to not have these inline functions. I will talk to the Hurd > > maintainers about this, do you have an opinion whether a change in krb5 > > (at least for Debian) is feasable in the meantime? > > Given that we're already patching specific to Debian for Hurd portability, > I think it's reasonable to add additional weak pragmas for the Hurd if you > can provide a patch that only does this on Hurd (I don't know which > pragmas are needed).
The attached patch makes the build go fine. > However, I don't think it's the right long-term solution for > applications to have to know about this sort of internal > implementation detail, so ideally I think it should be fixed in > libpthread in the long term. Agreed. We already had this issue with libstdc++, and will need to find a more general solution soon. thanks, Michael -- Michael Banck Debian Developer [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.advogato.org/person/mbanck/diary.html
--- include/k5-thread.h.orig 2005-12-01 22:12:36.000000000 +0100 +++ include/k5-thread.h 2005-12-01 22:05:37.000000000 +0100 @@ -375,6 +375,12 @@ # pragma weak pthread_mutex_init # pragma weak pthread_self # pragma weak pthread_equal +# if __GNU__ +# pragma weak _pthread_mutex_lock +# pragma weak _pthread_mutex_unlock +# pragma weak _pthread_mutex_destroy +# pragma weak _pthread_mutex_init +# endif /* __GNU__ */ # ifdef HAVE_PTHREAD_MUTEXATTR_SETROBUST_NP_IN_THREAD_LIB # pragma weak pthread_mutexattr_setrobust_np # endif
