[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [PATCH 5/5] add setting gs/fsbase

From: Samuel Thibault
Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/5] add setting gs/fsbase
Date: Sat, 22 Apr 2023 02:57:29 +0200
User-agent: NeoMutt/20170609 (1.8.3)

Sergey Bugaev, le ven. 21 avril 2023 17:30:12 +0300, a ecrit:
> On Fri, Apr 21, 2023 at 12:24 PM Samuel Thibault
> <samuel.thibault@gnu.org> wrote:
> > No, they don't :) otherwise they wouldn't respect the ABI. The AMD64
> > ABI indeed defaults to /lib/ld64.so.1, and says that Linux uses
> > /lib64/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2, and that is cast in stone, we cannot change
> > it any more.
> >
> > /lib/ld-x86-64.so.1 should be completely fine.
> I don't think I understand -- so the AMD64 ABI spec requires it to be
> /lib/ld64.so.1,

It does not require it to be that, it says it should be that. But it's a
very bad idea since it doesn't permit to distinguish different 64bit

> but it also mentions that Linux uses
> /lib64/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2,

Yes, because Linux chose to use that, to encode the OS name and the arch
in the path.

> and that means we should be using /lib/ld-x86-64.so.1?

Yes, because we do want to put the arch name in the path. We could want
to put "gnu-" in it too, it's just about time to decide. After we have
some settled distribution, we should really not change that.

> Moreover, how does the ELF spec requiring a specific file path for
> INTERP make any sense at all?

For interoperability between distributions.

> Surely the .1 is the soname means something, we should be able to bump
> it to .2 when we break ABI really bad?

Yes, but we'd rather avoid that if possible.

> What if the system is not a Unix and doesn't use /lib/ or .so for its
> libraries (but still uses ELF as a format)?

Then it's not the same system and thus it's free to use whatever
interpreter path it prefers. But it should really rather stick to it
once decided, for interoperability.


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]