Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2013 14:36:14 +0800 From: Julian Elischer <julian@freebsd.org> To: Mateusz Guzik <mjguzik@gmail.com>, Mark Johnston <markj@freebsd.org>, Gennady Proskurin <gprspb@mail.ru>, freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: ldd runs linux programs Message-ID: <51F8B05E.5030003@freebsd.org> In-Reply-To: <20130729205449.GA6007@dft-labs.eu> References: <20130728193110.GB17514@gpr.nnz-home.ru> <20130728204958.GA32322@dft-labs.eu> <51F5D491.1080803@freebsd.org> <20130729081254.GB32322@dft-labs.eu> <20130729155625.GA2544@charmander> <20130729205449.GA6007@dft-labs.eu>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 7/30/13 4:54 AM, Mateusz Guzik wrote: > On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 11:56:25AM -0400, Mark Johnston wrote: >>> 127276 suggests running the binary as is (which I don't like) and >>> achieves this with a hacky way. So if we really want to do this, the >>> patch should be reworked to detect Linux binaries properly. >>> >>> In general we should gain linux_ldd (like linux_kdump) and our ldd >>> should work only on FreeBSD binaries. The last part is achieved with my >>> patch. >>> >>> markj, are you working on this? >> Not really; my original fix for this problem was essentially the same as >> yours. That is, just change ldd(1) to bail if the OS ABI byte isn't >> equal to ELFOSABI_FREEBSD. That's the change I have committed in my >> local tree right now. >> >> Then I thought I'd try to get ldd to work properly with Linux binaries >> as well, but wasn't sure what the right approach should be. As the above >> PR suggests, the easy thing to do is to just pass >> LD_TRACE_LOADED_OBJECTS and not LD_32_TRACE_LOADED_OBJECTS for 32-bit >> ELF objects if the OS isn't FreeBSD. This feels somewhat hacky to me, >> but I didn't really see another approach. >> >> That said, I think your patch should be committed since it's clearly an >> improvement over the current behaviour. I'm willing to test and commit >> it, and clean up the open PRs. If you could expand on the right way to >> handle Linux binaries, I'd be willing to implement and commit that too. >> I don't quite understand your reference to linux_kdump though - I have >> no such program on my laptop running CURRENT, and ktrace+kdump seem to >> work fine with the Linux binaries under /compat/linux. >> > Well, there was linux_kdump in ports but it apparently got obsolete as > necessary support for included in our regular kdump. > > So it may make sense to teach our ldd how to deal with Linux binaries > for consistency, but its unclear for me if this is better than providing > linux_ldd. Also there is the problem of (not) appending /compat/linux to > printed paths (for Linux binaries the kernel performs file lookups against > /compat/linux first). I'm not that interested in this problem though. :P > > That being said, if you want to do something with this, I suggest > cleaning up PRs and reviving discussion in > http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=bin/127276 if linux binaries are installed then chain to libexec/linux-ldd just like fsck chains to various specific fsck binaries. If there is no such chain loadable ldd, then just refuse to do anything. >
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?51F8B05E.5030003>