discuss-gnustep
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: make fails in gnustep base


From: Andreas Fink
Subject: Re: make fails in gnustep base
Date: Mon, 3 Sep 2018 10:15:42 +0200

I recompiled all with clang7 on a freshly installed Debian9. Now all the tests 
in libobjc2 pass and gnustep-base all except a few pass (the others are 
probably broken since a long time but are minor things).
My application however still doesn't run properly. I have code taking apart 
some ASN1 which out of a sudden produces lots of NULL pointers instead which is 
totally puzzling as this is test cases which worked since ages.

I've broken it down to a test case to isolate the cause and came to the 
conclusion that if two libraries are linked in a very specific order, I have 
this problem. If they are linked in the reverse order, I do not have it.
They are all dynamic libraries and there's no special cases here.  library ulib 
is my base library where my root class resides. ulibasn1 is my ASN1 decoding 
library which subclasses from ulib. ulibtcap is another class which indirectly 
inherits from ulib but uses ulibasn1 as well.

if I link   -lulibasn1  -lulibtcap  it works
if I link   -lulibtcap -lulibasn1 it fails.

I dont understand how this can happen. There are no unique names which should 
overlap or the like.

Does anyone have a clue what could cause this?
The link order in my case is generated by pkg-config automatically.

My test case uses ulibasn1 and ulib and nothing else. If I add ulibtcap to the 
linking (but not being used at all inside my test case) the problem starts 
appearing. Really weird!



> On 31 Aug 2018, at 10:29, David Chisnall <gnustep@theravensnest.org> wrote:
> 
> On 31/08/2018 09:22, Andreas Fink wrote:
>> all latest compiled from these sources:
> 
> It looks like someone at Apple broke blocks on all ELF platforms a couple of 
> weeks ago.  It's not been merged to the 7 release branch though, so building 
> from that should fix things for you.
> 
> David
> 





reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]