Subject: Re: Removal of SA vs. icky libc ABI breakage
To: Lubomir Sedlacik <salo@Xtrmntr.org>
From: Quentin Garnier <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 03/05/2007 08:29:17
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
On Mon, Mar 05, 2007 at 02:46:39AM +0100, Lubomir Sedlacik wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 04, 2007 at 06:47:58PM +0000, David Laight wrote:
> > 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.
> both ways work, i just tested. here's what i did.
Yes, but it was very much expected. The question is: what's easier?
libc, libcrypt and libpthread are part of a normal build, as we do every
week, so distribution is not a problem. I don't see how we would build
that small .so, except as a one time thing and provide just the binary
on the site. Less than ideal.
> but these work only for the load time. how would you solve the issue at
> the link time?
What kind of issue could there possibly be at link (ld, not ld.so_elf)
Quentin Garnier - email@example.com - 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-----