From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 6996 invoked by alias); 5 Jul 2011 15:01:50 -0000 Received: (qmail 6983 invoked by uid 22791); 5 Jul 2011 15:01:49 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.0 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from rock.gnat.com (HELO rock.gnat.com) (205.232.38.15) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Tue, 05 Jul 2011 15:01:29 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by filtered-rock.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 167F92BAB0F; Tue, 5 Jul 2011 11:01:29 -0400 (EDT) Received: from rock.gnat.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (rock.gnat.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id BWcuAJf21LbY; Tue, 5 Jul 2011 11:01:29 -0400 (EDT) Received: from joel.gnat.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by rock.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DF5532BAAD5; Tue, 5 Jul 2011 11:01:28 -0400 (EDT) Received: by joel.gnat.com (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 5A331145615; Tue, 5 Jul 2011 08:01:23 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 05 Jul 2011 15:01:00 -0000 From: Joel Brobecker To: Paul Koning Cc: gdb@sourceware.org Subject: Re: Undefined symbol while executing Python Message-ID: <20110705150123.GF15572@adacore.com> References: <674EAAD3-EF0C-451B-BC73-5D39F33E6780@dell.com> <00001CBF-4AB1-41C4-988A-4D817CA8ED73@dell.com> <20110702020837.GG2421@adacore.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14) Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2011-07/txt/msg00017.txt.bz2 > Thanks, that cured the problem (once I figured out where to insert > it). It turns out that, while there is a /usr/lib/libpython2.4, the > gdb link is done against /usr/lib/python2.4/config/libpython2.4.a. > I'm not sure why. It's probably actually a good thing because that > binary is being built for a group of people, some of whom have a > different version of python installed. It's been a while since I looked at this, but I do remember that the Python team has decided that the default way of doing things is to create the static lib, and to link against the static lib. Things get a little fuzzier for me on how the Python binaries are built for the various distros, as they all build Python with the shared version available. ISTR that some systems have a shared libpython on the one hand, and then a python install that was build with static python. As a result, python-config.py would still think that python was statically linked and would think that there is no shared libpython. Anyways, I'm just rambling, and could be completely off the mark. > Anyway, it would be good if gdb built correctly (i.e., with that > switch) out of the box rather than requiring manual non-obvious > hacking. I can't remember why I never submitted this patch. But I remember that some of the changes we made in-house at AdaCore were not suitable for everyone, and thus were withdrawn. I can look again at submitting this bit, if I can convince myself (and others) that it doesn't have a potential negative impact, but right now is not the best time for me :-(. -- Joel