| 1 |
On 07/22/2013 09:19 AM, Benda Xu wrote: |
| 2 |
> Dear Luca, |
| 3 |
> |
| 4 |
> On Tue, Jul 2, 2013 at 12:27 AM, Luca Barbato <lu_zero@g.o> wrote: |
| 5 |
> |
| 6 |
>> |
| 7 |
>> The patch itself is partially wrong (you might want to use a totally |
| 8 |
>> different layout) but surely looks interesting. |
| 9 |
>> |
| 10 |
> |
| 11 |
> I'd like to revisit this topic. Could you please be a bit more specific on |
| 12 |
> where it is partially wrong? |
| 13 |
> |
| 14 |
> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2011-01/msg01904.html |
| 15 |
> |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
You have some flavours, e.g. |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
+#define GLIBC_DYNAMIC_LINKER32 RUNTIME_ROOT_PREFIX "/lib/ld-linux.so.2" |
| 20 |
+#define GLIBC_DYNAMIC_LINKER64 RUNTIME_ROOT_PREFIX |
| 21 |
"/lib64/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2" |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
or |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
+#define UCLIBC_DYNAMIC_LINKER RUNTIME_ROOT_PREFIX "/lib/ld-uClibc.so.0" |
| 26 |
+#define UCLIBC_DYNAMIC_LINKER32 RUNTIME_ROOT_PREFIX "/lib/ld-uClibc.so.0" |
| 27 |
+#define UCLIBC_DYNAMIC_LINKER64 RUNTIME_ROOT_PREFIX "/lib/ld64-uClibc.so.0" |
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
And you add some prefix to it. |
| 30 |
|
| 31 |
while the correct patch would just wipe all this cruft and have a |
| 32 |
|
| 33 |
DYNAMIC_LINKER_{32/64/default} and a mean to set it. |
| 34 |
|
| 35 |
Everything is still not exactly great since you could have more than 2 |
| 36 |
abis per architecture. |
| 37 |
|
| 38 |
As said the patch is surely an improvement over the previous situation |
| 39 |
but doesn't help solving the problem fully. |
| 40 |
|
| 41 |
lu |
Archives