From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.org/gmane.linux.lib.musl.general/3076 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Szabolcs Nagy Newsgroups: gmane.linux.lib.musl.general Subject: Re: vfprintf.c:(.text+0xc6c): undefined reference to `__signbitl' Date: Mon, 8 Apr 2013 23:26:02 +0200 Message-ID: <20130408212602.GX30576@port70.net> References: <3be4bde4515370b19e34c578d4ebfe3e.squirrel@alpha.tmit.bme.hu> <20130408200535.GW30576@port70.net> Reply-To: musl@lists.openwall.com NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1365456374 25897 80.91.229.3 (8 Apr 2013 21:26:14 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 8 Apr 2013 21:26:14 +0000 (UTC) To: musl@lists.openwall.com Original-X-From: musl-return-3080-gllmg-musl=m.gmane.org@lists.openwall.com Mon Apr 08 23:26:18 2013 Return-path: Envelope-to: gllmg-musl@plane.gmane.org Original-Received: from mother.openwall.net ([195.42.179.200]) by plane.gmane.org with smtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1UPJZu-0002dp-Vx for gllmg-musl@plane.gmane.org; Mon, 08 Apr 2013 23:26:15 +0200 Original-Received: (qmail 25976 invoked by uid 550); 8 Apr 2013 21:26:14 -0000 Mailing-List: contact musl-help@lists.openwall.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: Original-Received: (qmail 25967 invoked from network); 8 Apr 2013 21:26:14 -0000 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.linux.lib.musl.general:3076 Archived-At: * meres5@alpha.tmit.bme.hu [2013-04-08 22:41:28 +0200]: > > > > gcc -dM -E - > meres5@alpha:~/src/eglibc/ports$ gcc -dM -E - #define __LDBL_MAX__ 1.79769313486231580793728971405301e+308L > #define __LDBL_MAX_EXP__ 1024 > #define __LDBL_HAS_INFINITY__ 1 > #define __LDBL_MIN__ 2.00416836000897277799610805135016e-292L > #define __LDBL_HAS_QUIET_NAN__ 1 > #define __LDBL_HAS_DENORM__ 1 > #define __LDBL_EPSILON__ 4.94065645841246544176568792868221e-324L > #define __LDBL_MANT_DIG__ 106 this is bad, it is 'double-double' long double format which means broken long double arithmetics > #define __LDBL_MIN_EXP__ (-968) > #define __LDBL_MAX_10_EXP__ 308 > #define __LDBL_DENORM_MIN__ 4.94065645841246544176568792868221e-324L > #define __LDBL_MIN_10_EXP__ (-291) > #define __LDBL_DIG__ 31 > > I won't like to descend so deep. > I've just like to demo the difference between static and > dynamic linking to our students, and came up here - LOL! if you want to play with static linking then it's better not to use soft-float long double, that ruins it a lot (every trivial program will get an entire floating point emulation library linked in from libgcc pulled in by printf so the students will get the impression that static linking always gives bloated binaries..) the correct thing to do is to build a toolchain with 64bit long double > Anyway, it's been 19 years passed, so my guide seemed not so > durable. > Also Linux dropped the concept of static linking in practivce. > Goodby kiss to linux did not drop it, but for some reason the glibc and binutils maintainers thought that dynamic linking is always better so it's enough to support that