Re: Add a common library

[Steven Dake <sdake@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On 02/07/2012 05:43 PM, Angus Salkeld wrote:
> Hi
> 
> Here is a good idea IMO. But as-is will require a re-build of all
> user applications.
> 
> We currently have lots of inline functions in header files just to be shared
> between corosync and the libraries. We also have the same functions
> been implemented in both places. libqb has helped reduce this but the
> problem still exists.
> 
> Another unplesent issue is if we need to apply a fix to any of these
> inline functions the user applications need to be rebuilt.
> 
> So choose a rebuild now or multiple times down the line.
> 
> -Angus
> 
> 
> cc -o tcpg test/testcpg.c -Iinclude/corosync/ -lcpg
> /usr/bin/ld: /tmp/ccnqIwOB.o: undefined reference to symbol 'cs_strerror'
> /usr/bin/ld: note: 'cs_strerror' is defined in DSO /usr/lib64/libcorosync_common.so.4 so try adding it to the linker command line
> /usr/lib64/libcorosync_common.so.4: could not read symbols: Invalid operation
> collect2: ld returned 1 exit status
> 
> 

Angus,

I know we had talked about a static library and linking that into each
so.  I had some concerns about symbol collisions.  I tested that out,
and it seems to work.  I'd prefer that approach to requiring the need of
a separate -lcorosync_common.  I'll send my patch to the list so you can
see what I did.  I'll also send my test program linked against cpg and cmap.

Regards
-steve

> 
> _______________________________________________
> discuss mailing list
> discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxx
> http://lists.corosync.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss

_______________________________________________
discuss mailing list
discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.corosync.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss