Subject: Re: Removal of SA vs. icky libc ABI breakage
To: None <firstname.lastname@example.org>
From: Quentin Garnier <email@example.com>
Date: 03/04/2007 20:58:09
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
On Sun, Mar 04, 2007 at 06:47:58PM +0000, David Laight wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 04, 2007 at 07:41:42PM +0100, Quentin Garnier wrote:
> > Hi,
> > Following the removal of SA and its syscalls, there have been
> > discussions on how to use older releases with a post-newlock2 kernel.
> > The theory is that you just have to drop in a new libpthread and libc in
> > the file-system and everything should work as before.
> I think that it may only be necessary to create a small .so containing
> the new syscall stubs. Then only the new libpthread would be needed.
> Maybe ld.so.conf could get the library loaded, alternatively it could
> be built with a .SONAME matching that of libpthread, with a .NEEDED
> entry to pull in the new libpthread itself.
What do you propose to distribute and install that .so? I agree that
just that is needed, but it's about as hard to install.
Quentin Garnier - firstname.lastname@example.org - cube@NetBSD.org
"You could have made it, spitting out benchmarks
Owe it to yourself not to fail"
Amplifico, Spitting Out Benchmarks, Hometakes Vol. 2, 2005.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (NetBSD)
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----