[9fans] 5l

[9fans] 5l

[erik quanstrom]

i don't understand these error messages from 5l.  (8l doesn't seem
to do quite the same thing)

plock: incompatible type signatures 574ec04f(taslock.5) and 9dcf33f5(/arm/lib/libc.a(free)) for lock
minooka²; nm -aT taslock.5|grep free
minooka²; 

taslock doesn't define the symbol, so why do i get this error?

- erik

Re: [9fans] 5l

[Charles Forsyth]

it doesn't say that taslock.5 defines free incompatibly: there's a
disagreement about lock.
free and taslock are being linked together, and both call lock, but
they have incompatible definitions for lock, most likely because Lock
is different in each scope.
taslock.5 defines lock; free calls it.

On 12 December 2012 21:47, erik quanstrom <quanstro@quanstro.net> wrote:
> plock: incompatible type signatures 574ec04f(taslock.5) and 9dcf33f5(/arm/lib/libc.a(free)) for lock
> minooka²; nm -aT taslock.5|grep free
> minooka²;
>
> taslock doesn't define the symbol, so why do i get this error?

Re: [9fans] 5l

[Richard Miller]

>  most likely because Lock
> is different in each scope.

/sys/src/*/dat.h defines Lock, /sys/include/libc.h defines it differently.
You may be trying to link a kernel with some function like lock() coming
from libc instead of its own version.

Re: [9fans] 5l

[Charles Forsyth]

the diagnostic says that free is being taken from libc, so it will
have libc's version.
normally free is defined in port.

On 12 December 2012 22:53, Richard Miller <9fans@hamnavoe.com> wrote:
> You may be trying to link a kernel with some function like lock() coming
> from libc instead of its own version.

Re: [9fans] 5l

[erik quanstrom]

On Wed Dec 12 17:54:09 EST 2012, 9fans@hamnavoe.com wrote:
> >  most likely because Lock
> > is different in each scope.
>
> /sys/src/*/dat.h defines Lock, /sys/include/libc.h defines it differently.
> You may be trying to link a kernel with some function like lock() coming
> from libc instead of its own version.

yes, yes, all correct.  i misread the diagnostic.  sorry for the noise.

- erik