[usocket-devel] Compile failure on CLISP 2.46

[Hans Hübner]

"libc.so" is somewhat of the standard system default on all things
Unix, with Darwin being different.  The idea is to have libc.so be a
symbolic link to the real thing.  Loading with an explicit version
number is a bad idea, but then, Unix is full of bad ideas.

What I mean to say is:  There is no sensible way to load libc in a
system independent manner.  It is certainly supposed into every
program anyway.

-Hans

On Wed, Oct 1, 2008 at 03:40, Chun Tian (binghe) <binghe.lisp at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>
>> No. libc.so.6 just for Linux, I think it means the 6th big revision (with
>> incompatible API changes) of the GNU C Library.
>>
>> On Solaris (I have some Solaris 10 (both SPARC and x86) boxes), there's no
>> libc.so.6 but libc.so.1:
>>
>> binghe at sparc-1:/usr/lib$ ls -l libc.so*
>> lrwxrwxrwx   1 root     root          19 Aug  4 17:16 libc.so ->
>> ../../lib/libc.so.1
>> lrwxrwxrwx   1 root     root          19 Aug  4 17:16 libc.so.1 ->
>> ../../lib/libc.so.1
>>
>> binghe at sparc-1:/usr/lib$ ldd /bin/ls
>>       libsec.so.1 =>   /lib/libsec.so.1
>>       libc.so.1 =>     /lib/libc.so.1
>>       libavl.so.1 =>   /lib/libavl.so.1
>>       libm.so.2 =>     /lib/libm.so.2
>>       /platform/SUNW,Ultra-80/lib/libc_psr.so.1
>>
>> And on FreeBSD (which I don't have a running one), since they also do not
>> use GNU C Library either, it's quite possible that the libc.so revision
>> isn't "6" too.
>>
>> But, on all UNIX, I think the file "/usr/lib/libc.so" will be the right
>> answer.
>
> Except Darwin (Mac OS X), which is "/usr/lib/libc.dylib", which point to
> "libSystem.dylib", I don't know if it's also from FreeBSD.
>
> --binghe
>
> _______________________________________________
> usocket-devel mailing list
> usocket-devel at common-lisp.net
> http://common-lisp.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/usocket-devel
>