From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: <azarah@gentoo.org> X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 4.0.0 (2022-12-14) on finch.gentoo.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.1 required=5.0 tests=DMARC_NONE,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, NICE_REPLY_A,RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3,RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=4.0.0 Received: from starcraft.mweb.co.za (starcraft.mweb.co.za [196.2.45.78]) by chiba.3jane.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5F202ABDBB for <gentoo-dev@gentoo.org>; Wed, 5 Jun 2002 16:24:20 -0500 (CDT) Received: from cpt-dial-196-30-179-123.mweb.co.za ([196.30.179.123] helo=nosferatu.lan) by starcraft.mweb.co.za with esmtp (Exim 4.01) id 17FiGI-00087X-00 for gentoo-dev@gentoo.org; Wed, 05 Jun 2002 23:24:10 +0200 Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] libGLcore error From: Martin Schlemmer <azarah@gentoo.org> To: Gentoo-Dev <gentoo-dev@gentoo.org> In-Reply-To: <200206060900.08741.lars.pechan@paradise.net.nz> References: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0206040910430.1842-100000@thunderbird.junta.iitk.ac.in> <200206051626.23294.lars.pechan@paradise.net.nz> <1023307867.7489.45.camel@nosferatu.lan> <200206060900.08741.lars.pechan@paradise.net.nz> Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.0.5 Date: 05 Jun 2002 23:23:19 +0200 Message-Id: <1023312201.7552.54.camel@nosferatu.lan> Mime-Version: 1.0 Sender: gentoo-dev-admin@gentoo.org Errors-To: gentoo-dev-admin@gentoo.org X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.6 Precedence: bulk Reply-To: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org List-Help: <mailto:gentoo-dev-request@gentoo.org?subject=help> List-Post: <mailto:gentoo-dev@gentoo.org> List-Subscribe: <http://lists.gentoo.org/mailman/listinfo/gentoo-dev>, <mailto:gentoo-dev-request@gentoo.org?subject=subscribe> List-Id: Gentoo Linux developer list <gentoo-dev.gentoo.org> List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.gentoo.org/mailman/listinfo/gentoo-dev>, <mailto:gentoo-dev-request@gentoo.org?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <http://lists.gentoo.org/pipermail/gentoo-dev/> X-Archives-Salt: e26e96da-a4f6-4034-a259-1e5ad4be318e X-Archives-Hash: 1c7a2a34c49ec1ba6eb54fcb38db5a69 On Wed, 2002-06-05 at 23:00, Lars Pechan wrote: > Thanks a lot but I would like to think that I have put quite a big effort into > finding out a) why nvidia's opengl driver doesn't work and b) how to get it > working. So have others too. I also think I have a reasonable understading of > what is going on. > > For more info on the subject see these threads in the forums: > > http://forums.gentoo.org/viewtopic.php?t=3701 > http://forums.gentoo.org/viewtopic.php?t=3963 > > Also the following url helps in mapping out what the issues are > http://sources.redhat.com/ml/libc-alpha/2002-04/msg00025.html. > > Also, the link you are referring to is mentioned in the forum postings. > > In short, yes the problem stems from the gcc-team having changed the layout of > a library by hiding certain symbols. However, it's not clear whether this > happened for 3.1 or in fact earlier. It did work earlier because the > linker/binutils didn't care about the .hidden attribute anyway and in fact > still works under 3.1 depending on what version of binutils is used. > > To see this happening try building one system with binutils 2.12 and one with > 2.11 _both_ using gcc-3.1. The nvidia opengl driver will work on one but not > the other despite both having been compiled with the same compiler. That > doesn't make it binutils' "fault" but it is clear that what version of > binutils you use produce different end results. > > My concern hasn't been to find someone to put the blame on but to understand > what is happening and how to fix it. I personally think one has to be very > careful playing the blame game in an open source environment. > > I'm not suggesting it's nvidias "fault", if anything I'm grateful for them > providing good drivers even if they are binaries. However, I am suggesting > that nvidia have been caught unawares by the change and also that their > library wouldn't build on my (or any other gcc-3.1 + latest binutils) system. > > I'm also suggesting a couple of workarounds for those who can't get opengl > going on their new shiny 3.1-built systems. Some have (I believe) been > successful in applying the patch to glibc but others haven't and for them > these workarounds will do the trick. > Bad form on my side. Sorry, to quick a reply after just comming home with a long day at work behind me. No excuse I know. Btw, I am almost positive it worked fine for gcc-3.0 and binutils-2.12. -- Martin Schlemmer Gentoo Linux Developer, Desktop Team Developer Cape Town, South Africa