Subject: Re: An annoying failure I've seen a lot of.
To: None <current-users@NetBSD.ORG>
From: Christos Zoulas <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 08/28/1996 19:57:38
In article <199608281442.JAA06068@cynjut.neonramp.com> email@example.com (Dave Burgess) writes:
>OK. Stupid Question #1:
>Why wouldn't this give a reasonable error message (like "dynamic linker
>not found") or some other indication? There is probably a
>infrastructure reason I just can't see.
We would need to add an additional errno for this and document it as a
possible return code from execve(). I thought about doing that a while
ago, but decided it was not a very good idea. Now that the pmax elf
stuff is integrated, there is a better reason to add it.
>Stupid Question #3:
>I also have a copy of Informix which provides me precisely the same
>problem the Linux executable did (I love flea markets). I
>assume I will need to fill an /emul/svr4 directory with the same
>stuff as I did for Linux. Any insight on what I might need? Do we
>even support dynamic SCO executables? Any sources on where to get
>this stuff? Am I going to have to add the COMPAT_SVR4 option back in?
>Will the Linux stuff just make it work? I'm going to try it tonight,
>but any insight at all would really make my evening much more
>productive. If I get this working, I promise to write it up in the FAQ.
SCO binaries are COMPAT_IBCS2; Solaris and other SVR4 binaries are
COMPAT_SVR4. I guess that you'll need all the shared libraries for it