[uClibc] Re: The naming wars continue...

[Denis Vlasenko]

On Thursday 28 October 2004 10:31, Ivan Popov wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 28, 2004 at 11:38:14AM +0300, Denis Vlasenko wrote:
> > On Tuesday 26 October 2004 11:55, Ivan Popov wrote:
> > > with an arbitrary collection of libraries, without collisions,
> > > via a simple wrapper.
> > > You could do things which you can't with LD_LIBRARY_PATH.
> > >
> > > Please consider the useful design features...
> >
> > For the record: this would (and it did for me) break horribly
> > with uc-programs exec-ing glibc ones.
>
> Denis,
>
> just for clarity for the list readers,
>
> I assume that by "this" you mean LD_LIBRARY_PATH,
> as an explicit loader (with an explicit library-path option)
> does not in any way influence following execs.

You are right. Problem was in the fact that typically
child processes inherit environment and thus
glibc programs were trying to link against uclibc .so
files.

Because of this, wrapping uclibc binaries ala

#!/bin/sh
LD_LIBRARY_PATH=/libu:/usr/libu <program> "$@"

is not 100% usable for me.
-- 
vda