Re: Eclipse 3.0 Running ILLEGALY on Kaffe
Brian Thomas Sniffen <bts@alum.mit.edu> writes:
> Combining X+Y in the way that you have described is anything but
> mechanical: it is a task which typically takes a skilled programmer a
> great amount of time and thought. Different programmers might do it
> in different ways. I'm not referring here to the work done by ld, but
> to the process of building a new program which has libfoo as a
> component.
>
> Additionally, the program ultimately delivered to the user isn't X
> with some minor bits of Y. It contains big chunks of Y -- one per
> function used, at least -- directly copied. Just being in a different
> memory space isn't enough to change the relationship between the
> creative parts of the works. The program vim encompasses a copy of
> libc.
Wrong. A dynamically linked program in ELF format (the most common on
Linux systems) contains a list of undefined symbols, and a list of
sonames to search for those symbols. I have a hard time seeing how
this would make a program derived from the library. If multiple
independent implementations of the library exist, which would the
program be derived from?
The program vim contains a list of function names, all of which are
found in the ISO C standard, or in one of POSIX, SuS etc. It also
mentions a soname similar to libc.so.6. Please explain how that can
form a copy of libc.
In the case of Java, the binding is even looser. A class might
contain references to other classes which the JVM is free to look for
anywhere it pleases. AFAIK, Eclipse uses only the standard Java API
as published by Sun, and will run equally well with any implementation
of said interface.
This whole discussion is something between ridiculous and hilarious,
definitely not useful.
--
Måns Rullgård
mru@inprovide.com
Reply to: