From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Jan 4 23:43:47 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@FreeBSD.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A333E16A417; Fri, 4 Jan 2008 23:43:47 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from sobomax@FreeBSD.org) Received: from sippysoft.com (gk.360sip.com [72.236.70.226]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5A5C213C448; Fri, 4 Jan 2008 23:43:47 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from sobomax@FreeBSD.org) Received: from [192.168.0.3] ([204.244.149.125]) (authenticated bits=0) by sippysoft.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id m04NhguR010859 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Fri, 4 Jan 2008 15:43:43 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from sobomax@FreeBSD.org) Message-ID: <477EC481.9060303@FreeBSD.org> Date: Fri, 04 Jan 2008 15:42:57 -0800 From: Maxim Sobolev Organization: Sippy Software, Inc. User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.9 (Windows/20071031) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Peter Wemm References: <477C82F0.5060809@freebsd.org> <863ateemw2.fsf@ds4.des.no> <200801032200.25650.peter.schuller@infidyne.com> <8663yac62d.fsf@ds4.des.no> <477E72FC.5070304@freebsd.org> <477EA466.6060204@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Jason Evans , freebsd-current@FreeBSD.org, =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Dag-Erling_Sm=F8?=, Tim Kientzle , =?ISO-8859-1?Q?rgrav?= , Peter Schuller Subject: Re: ELF dynamic loader name [was: sbrk(2) broken] X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 04 Jan 2008 23:43:47 -0000 Peter Wemm wrote: > There are a whole bunch of references to the ld-elf.so.1 name. Not just > in our tree, but in external 3rd party code. Even things like gdb > "know" how to handle ld-elf.so.1. Getting those upstream folks to add > additional strcmp()'s for ld-elf-i386.so.1, ld-elf-amd64.so.1 etc will > be hard enough, and it will add another hurdle that minor platform > maintainers have to overcome. ld-elf-mips-be-4Kc.so.1 anybody? (ok, > that last one is a stretch) P.S. I wonder why gdb(1) and friends need that strcmp()'s and don't use appropriate field from the elf header. I am pretty sure that dynamic linker name is embedded on link time in there. At least that's the very first string that is returned by invoking string(1) on any dynamic binary. -Maxim