From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.org/gmane.linux.lib.musl.general/7893 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: "Anthony G. Basile" Newsgroups: gmane.linux.lib.musl.general Subject: Re: [PATCH] Allow different paths for static and shared libraries Date: Sat, 06 Jun 2015 14:21:47 -0400 Message-ID: <55733A3B.2040802@opensource.dyc.edu> References: <1433057065-9167-1-git-send-email-ismael@iodev.co.uk> <20150531073157.GR17573@brightrain.aerifal.cx> <20150531061054.75f86040@pirotess> <20150531163034.GT17573@brightrain.aerifal.cx> <20150531185142.7cf46c31@pirotess> <20150601012725.GU17573@brightrain.aerifal.cx> Reply-To: musl@lists.openwall.com NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1433614926 11485 80.91.229.3 (6 Jun 2015 18:22:06 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 6 Jun 2015 18:22:06 +0000 (UTC) To: musl@lists.openwall.com Original-X-From: musl-return-7906-gllmg-musl=m.gmane.org@lists.openwall.com Sat Jun 06 20:22:02 2015 Return-path: Envelope-to: gllmg-musl@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from mother.openwall.net ([195.42.179.200]) by plane.gmane.org with smtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Z1IjJ-0005CS-Eo for gllmg-musl@m.gmane.org; Sat, 06 Jun 2015 20:22:01 +0200 Original-Received: (qmail 13706 invoked by uid 550); 6 Jun 2015 18:22:00 -0000 Mailing-List: contact musl-help@lists.openwall.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: Original-Received: (qmail 13688 invoked from network); 6 Jun 2015 18:21:59 -0000 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.6; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.7.0 In-Reply-To: Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.linux.lib.musl.general:7893 Archived-At: On 6/1/15 2:54 PM, Daniel Cegiełka wrote: > 2015-06-01 3:27 GMT+02:00 Rich Felker : >> On Sun, May 31, 2015 at 06:51:42PM -0300, Ismael Luceno wrote: >>> On Sun, 31 May 2015 12:30:34 -0400 >>> Rich Felker wrote: > >>> A ld script in place of libc.so, containing "GROUP ( /lib/libc.so )", >>> would workaround that. >> >> Are you sure? I think that would result in a dependency for >> "/lib/libc.so" getting put in the binary rather than one for >> "libc.so", and that's also a serious bug. > > from gentoo: > > # cat /usr/lib/libc.so > /* GNU ld script > Use the shared library, but some functions are only in > the static library, so try that secondarily. */ > OUTPUT_FORMAT(elf64-x86-64) > GROUP ( /lib64/libc.so.6 /usr/lib64/libc_nonshared.a AS_NEEDED ( > /lib64/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2 ) ) > > btw. I am not a fan of this solution. > > Daniel > > >> Rich Just reading some of my backmail here and I want to clarify a point. That file was taken from a gentoo *glibc* system not musl. On the stage3 tarballs I push out we have: # file /usr/lib/libc.so /usr/lib/libc.so: ELF 64-bit LSB shared object, x86-64, version 1 (SYSV), dynamically linked, stripped Admittedly other .so's in /usr/lib use similar ld scripts, this is not the case for libc.so on gentoo musl stages. I know this is a bit of an aside, but I didn't want readers of this list to be mislead. -- Anthony G. Basile, Ph. D. Chair of Information Technology D'Youville College Buffalo, NY 14201 (716) 829-8197