Date: Sun, 14 Sep 2008 16:33:47 +0200 From: Dominic Fandrey <kamikaze@bsdforen.de> To: John Baldwin <jhb@freebsd.org> Cc: freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org Subject: Re: amd64/127276: ldd invokes linux yes Message-ID: <48CD20CB.3040706@bsdforen.de> In-Reply-To: <200809111637.54863.jhb@freebsd.org> References: <200809111640.m8BGe4PX012172@freefall.freebsd.org> <200809111637.54863.jhb@freebsd.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
John Baldwin wrote: > FreeBSD binaries from various releases have been branded in different ways. I > would consider it more of a user error to run ldd on a Linux binary. :) You > could maybe add a "IMPLEMENTATION NOTES" section to the manpage that explains > how it works and why it will execute any binary using a different runtime > linker. > Well, documenting it is much better than the current state. Though in my opinion it doesn't matter to the user how it works, but what one expects the program to do. And the current behaviour is not what I expected. Would you instead accept a patch from me that does a compatibility check and bails out if the binary does not use the FreeBSD linker? The "IMPLEMENTATION NOTES" would still be nice to have, though. It's always a nice read to get an idea on how something works. And I find code much easier to decipher if I already know how it's supposed to do something. At least much easier than the opposite way, trying to glimpse how something works from the code. Regards
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?48CD20CB.3040706>