Date: prev next · Thread: first prev next last
2011 Archives by date, by thread · List index


On Aug 20, 2011, at 6:18 PM, Péter Rabi wrote:
I'm interested in your opinion about the following problem of mine:

There are probably libraries and executables in LibO that are
dynamically linked to libraries that they do not use.

I wrote some c++ code (attached) to find these needless dependencies. I
was using `ldd -u foo' to fetch the "unused direct dependencies" of foo
if its build is GnuMake-ified. The tool (libfilter) also removes the
entries of these unnecessary libs from the proper makefile.

I also attached a patch containing the result I got after running
libfilter. Unfortunately, it removed loads of libs that was
indispensable for running foo.

I'm wondering if you could tell me why did ldd misled me (what did I
misunderstood)?

First, you would need to use "ldd -r -u," otherwise it misses all the lazily resolved symbols (and 
the resulting dependencies).  Second, note that there can be various reasons for those 
dependencies, apart from observing they are required to resolve symbols for one specific build of 
LO.  (Such reasons could be differences in platform, environment, or configure switches; ABI 
requirements; one lib depending on .init code in another; … --- granted, some of these are more 
hypothetical than others…)  So, while such lists of useless dependencies are interesting, they need 
to be inspected more closely than to automatically remove them, I would say.  (Also see GNU ld's 
--as-needed.)

-Stephan

Context


Privacy Policy | Impressum (Legal Info) | Copyright information: Unless otherwise specified, all text and images on this website are licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License. This does not include the source code of LibreOffice, which is licensed under the Mozilla Public License (MPLv2). "LibreOffice" and "The Document Foundation" are registered trademarks of their corresponding registered owners or are in actual use as trademarks in one or more countries. Their respective logos and icons are also subject to international copyright laws. Use thereof is explained in our trademark policy.