Date: Thu, 16 Nov 2023 21:41:06 +0200 From: Konstantin Belousov <kostikbel@gmail.com> To: Jessica Clarke <jrtc27@freebsd.org> Cc: Dima Panov <fluffy@freebsd.org>, "src-committers@freebsd.org" <src-committers@freebsd.org>, "dev-commits-src-all@freebsd.org" <dev-commits-src-all@freebsd.org>, "dev-commits-src-main@freebsd.org" <dev-commits-src-main@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: git: 99132daf6f70 - main - rc.d/ldconfig: Prepend rtld stdlib paths to ldconfig(32)_paths Message-ID: <ZVZwUsBItmEdGIXP@kib.kiev.ua> In-Reply-To: <7E6896FA-85A3-41DC-9ECA-1D12B78BDA2E@freebsd.org> References: <202311132339.3ADNdZKF081019@gitrepo.freebsd.org> <d69be69b-47d4-45b2-932b-c513a651284d@FreeBSD.org> <7E6896FA-85A3-41DC-9ECA-1D12B78BDA2E@freebsd.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thu, Nov 16, 2023 at 01:33:12PM +0000, Jessica Clarke wrote: > On 16 Nov 2023, at 12:44, Dima Panov <fluffy@FreeBSD.org> wrote: > > > > Moin-moin! > > > > > > This cause some errors while running, at least on aarch64, host and poudriere jail > > > > > > # service ldconfig restart > > ELF ldconfig path: /lib /usr/lib /usr/lib/compat /usr/local/lib /usr/local/lib/compat/pkg /usr/local/lib/compat/pkg /usr/local/lib/e2fsprogs /usr/local/lib/mysql /usr/local/lib/perl5/5.38/mach/CORE /usr/local/llvm16/lib > > ELF binary type "9" not known. > > eval: /libexec/ld-elf32.so.1: Exec format error > > 32-bit compatibility ldconfig path: /usr/lib32 > > Yeah this breaks if the kernel and/or hardware don’t support 32-bit > compat (not uncommon on modern Arm hardware). Interestingly, it seems to be impossible to detect that arm64 hardware does not support executing in aarch32 mode, except trying to run a binary. Am I missing something? Would it be better to not register 32bit elf brand at all if hardware is not capable? > > Also, parsing the human-readable output of ld-elf.so.1 -v to determine > the path seems wrong and fragile. Given the above problem I think this > should just be reverted, but if we instead want to press ahead with > something like this (with suitable handling of this case) then we > should really have ld-elf.so.1 produce machine-readable output (which > could just be the space-separated string) for use the rc script, not go > mangling -v’s output. But I really don’t see the issue with putting the > paths in the script... Would would you qualify as machine-readable output from ld-elf.so.1 -v? Are you against spaces in the item key names?
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?ZVZwUsBItmEdGIXP>