Path: utzoo!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!ns-mx!ns-mx.uiowa.edu!dbrenner
From: dbrenner@sparta.weeg.uiowa.edu (Doug Brenner)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.next
Subject: Re: Library function redefinition
Message-ID: <DBRENNER.91Mar3012022@sparta.weeg.uiowa.edu>
Date: 3 Mar 91 07:20:22 GMT
References: <1991Feb28.190319.22658@usenet.ins.cwru.edu>
	<1991Mar1.143756.12400@usenet.ins.cwru.edu> <1383@toaster.SFSU.EDU>
Sender: news@ns-mx.uiowa.edu
Organization: U of Iowa, Iowa City, IA
Lines: 17
In-reply-to: eps@toaster.SFSU.EDU's message of 2 Mar 91 09:01:46 GMT

In article <1991Mar1.143756.12400@usenet.ins.cwru.edu> chet@po.CWRU.Edu writes:
  > It seems that the NeXT/Mach ld simply maps the library into my process's
  > address space, and damn any symbols that I already defined.

and then, from an expected source, a typical piece of wisdom:

In article <1383@toaster.SFSU.EDU> eps@toaster.SFSU.EDU (Mr. Toaster) writes:
  > Aww, poor baby.  Betcha don't use System V or SunOS 4.1+ either.

And I bet you haven't used shared libraries on Prime systems running Primos.

Yes, using that old, proprietery OS, you can actually have the benefits of
shared code WITHOUT having to "fix" 10% of your code just because you had the
bad luck to use a common function name.

Give it a rest.  NeXT may have chosen to create the same shared library
problems as "System V and SunOS 4.1+," but that doesn't make things okay.